|
Author
|
Topic: IL-2 Review in Feb. Flight Journal
|
Dude
Cadet
|
posted 12-05- 09:37 PM
  
Author raved about it saying it's "possibly the greatest advancement in simulator technology". Ran smooth on a 1Ghz T bird/384 Meg RAM/GeForce 2. Pretty choppy on a PIII 500Mhz/96 Meg RAM/GeForce2.IP: Logged |
semmern
Pilot
|
posted 12-06- 09:29 AM
Yeah, it looks soooo cool!  Thing is, I don't like the evolution of PC games. They require you to have the best hardware, and upgrade all the time. I bought my PII-350 two years ago, then it was absolutely top-of-the-line! Three months later, there was 450 mHz, a year later, there was PIII-600. Yer have to upgrade all the time to be able to play the best games. IP: Logged |
Gustang
Pilot
|
posted 12-06- 12:30 PM
Semmern,I hear ya. It is a high-maintenance hobby. Unless you're selective about the games you purchase, there goes about $150/month and about $500 annually in hardware. I still believe there will come a point in time where machine speed will plateau simply because it is no longer feasible to code bigger and better games. Development cycles on complicated games today are now reaching almost 3 years (some longer I know). The developers have to live throughout that time. The point being that in the current PC game market and the price that a game can bear it will be virtually (no pun) impossible to create bigger and better games and be able to break even. Tough to prove, but it makes sense to me. I think it can also be argued that games and computer upgrades go hand in hand. The 2 push each other's markets and developments. On the subject of Il-2, Oleg has mentioned that your pII-350 will run the game well, but with detail turned down. He also says that even with details turned all the way down it will look better than most contemporary sims. I've seen screens of the game with minimum detail, and I tend to agree with him. It still looks great. Besides sims that grow with you seem to hang around the longest. Oh, one last thing... never buy top of the line when it comes to computer hardware. There's always something faster...
[This message has been edited by Gustang (edited 12-06-2000).] IP: Logged |
Zurawski
Pilot
|
posted 12-06- 01:15 PM
...Gustang,I must politely disagree  How fast does one really need a PC to be to scroll a spread-sheet or build a database? "Games" ultimately push the PC technology (as much as they try to disguise it as an evolutionary process)... PC gaming is an expensive hobby, but no more than any other high-end hobby. You hunt? Licence.. gun.. ammo.. travel.. meat processing... etc. You Scuba? Assorted accessories.. tanks.. refills.. certification.. etc. (you get the point) Ultimately (as I see it)... PC gaming is no more expensive and any other hobby. It comes down to ones ability to accept the cost of "keeping up with the Jones"... and having the money to do so. IP: Logged |
ArgonV
Pilot
|
posted 12-06- 02:40 PM
Zur, how many times do you buy scuba equipment in a year? Or hunting equipment in a year? I hunt with a bow and gun and I find that I only have to buy the ammo every so often after I have everything else. And when I grow, I have to buy new clothes.... But most adults arent still growing so that really doesnt count. What Im getting at is when you buy scuba equipment for instance... it stays with you a loong time till it breaks. You dont go out and buy more/better scuba equipment because the fish got faster or the coral doesnt look as good thru my goggles compared to the latest scuba goggles. I find myself buying computer games and computer parts every month or two. IP: Logged |
Mighty
General
|
posted 12-06- 02:54 PM
Don't expect it to plateau anytime soon. The tools used to create both the code and the content are still pretty labor-intensive.The content in particular has many areas that lend themselves to better automation. As those tools get better we'll have more and higher quality content to throw at the hardware for a given expenditure. On the code side, we still have a lot of AI and physics which we're grossly simplifying right now. As we get more CPU cycles per second, different techniques will become viable. The trick, as always, is to have a good game designer to make all those cycles fun. IP: Logged |
charmstar
Pilot
|
posted 12-06- 03:46 PM
I'm more concerned that computer speeds will hit the plateau. Like Mighty said, there is always more stuff you could add to code to use up extra cycles: AI, more units, better graphics etc. I mean, say you have a computer 10X faster than the best one right now: that just means you can start flying SDOE missions with 100s of planes. If you maxed out the number of planes you wanted, then wouldn't you want to improve terrain detail, AI capability, graphics quality, movable ground units etc. etc. Plenty of room to grow on the software side.However, I took physics, and I'm wondering how small and tight the wiring in chips can get before you start getting some kind of interference screwing with the design. Basically, at some point in time, the effects of small-scale reality are going to kick in, and hardware developers might be SOL (unless they can find some way around it). charm IP: Logged |
Sv
Pilot
|
posted 12-06- 03:58 PM
I spend more on R/C (2 new planes a year)
...more on Golf (about every other week)
...and more on music (recording toys)I just bought a new Voodoo5 card for $200, not bad. My new radio for my last glider cost $100, and the glider was $150. I think it is on par with most other hobbies, unless you consider scrable a hobie  ------------------
-Sv =FC=
WWI in SDOE!
IP: Logged |
Gustang
Pilot
|
posted 12-06- 05:31 PM
Zur,Thank you for being polite. Sorry, but, LOL, what exactly are you disagreeing with?
Mighty,
You sank my battelship! Nope. I never expected that my imaginary plateau would come into being within the next 10 years. However, you did bring something interesting to mind- better tools. I hadn't thought about the tools becoming more efficient, squeezing even more code into the time given. Well, that pretty much blows my 20 year plateau out of the water... One more thought: Inefficient Code This is another biggy in my book of things that drive the cpu market. My questions are: How much time today is spent optimizing code versus writing it? What did this ratio look like 5 years ago and what will it look like 5 years from now? Because there are many different ways to approach the same problem, how much time is spent finding the best one before the first line is written? Finally, if it's inefficient, but only 1/100 notices, is this an acceptable result? At what point does it become unacceptable? Ugh, I just ran into one more thought: Will the advent of PC game consoles, such as X-box actually improve optimization techniques, since everyone is working with the same hardware? OR will the developers simply trim the project for the platform? Charmstar, Concerning CPUs, at .18 micron they still have room to make things smaller, but after that, given the same materials, perhaps cpus will start getting bigger again? Nah.. they'll hopefully move on to different materials... crystals (or other optical technology) and/or organics (eeewww). IP: Logged |
wakeup tailgunner
Pilot
|
posted 12-06- 06:44 PM
Whilst it's true technology is a ravenous beast, you can control it! My rig has been with me for 2 years, and is now getting an upgrade. I don't spend that much on it, but I accept that everything I buy will be out of date. I aim to hit 50% of top flight, which will do for a while. It's all a question of careful spending. You could throw limitless money at all hobbies, but you don't have to!My other big spend hobby is motorbikes. I fix them myself, and have made money re-building old wrecks. This helps to pay the bills. But as has been posted elsewhere, you can't expect to run high detail on hungry beast programs! You just have to live with it! IP: Logged |
Zurawski
Pilot
|
posted 12-06- 09:10 PM
..ArgonV,OK, my examples were overly simplistic SV however added a few quality and viable ones to the list... ...Gustang, What?... Hell, I just wanted to disagree with you! I've got a midling PIII 500 w 256 meg'o ram with a standard Geforce card... Nothing amazing, but "sufficient". However when this machine fails to allow me to anjoy my gaming hobby to the fullest, I'll upgrade (IL-2 might be my achiles heel).. I guess it boils down to "how" important your gaming hobby is to you. IP: Logged |
Gunner
Pilot
|
posted 12-07- 11:20 AM
I like Zur,He cuts through the BS and hacks your heart out. My kinda guy, hehe. ------------------
=Campaign For A Mitchell=
-=BAB=-Gunner IP: Logged |
Mighty
General
|
posted 12-07- 01:49 PM
Charm, if I'm not mistaken, we hit the limit ten years ago :-) Seriously, there are a lot of inovative engineers out there. As we reach one limit they figure out a new way to look at the goal such that the limit no longer applies.Gustang, on optimization. There's no such thing as "enough optimization." It's one of the facets of the program that you trade off with other features. Do you want 30 fps instead of 25? Do you achieve it with code changes or art changes? Or do you want to spend that time rearranging the network screen so that it's easier to navigate? And don't forget that "Shipping" is a feature. Gotta have that one. :-) IP: Logged |
Zurawski
Pilot
|
posted 12-07- 02:15 PM
...Mighty,I guess it's safe to say that until developers handle their own publication, distribution, and PR (not to mention financing)... Code optimization us ultimately ruled by ones publisher. I can only imagine what FSSDOE "could" have done better if Activision had chained their lawyers down and not shoved Parsoft to release when they did... I bet Michael and yourself are much more leary of who you make bed-fellows? IP: Logged | |
FSIC Messageboard
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
