Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
MatthewS

Can XP10 look like this?

Recommended Posts

Wings Of Prey was released a few days ago. I believe this WWII combat sim has been derived from the classic IL2 Sturmovik.Why would this be of interest to X-Plane users? Well, check out the amazing dense autogen, sharp ground textures, excellent 3D models, HDR lighting, self shadowing (including cockpit shadows), water (waves and transparent shallows) and best clouds (including shadows and windscreen rain effects) I've ever seen. No blurries, no stutter, and absolutely fluid fps.Is it possible that XPlane 10 could implement some of the same graphics capabilities? Is OpenGL as capable?Even if you're not into combat sims this demo (1.2gb) is worth downloading just to see where PC graphics are heading. And this is all using DX9. What could DX11 be capable of?This is probably what FS11 could have looked like had it not been canceled.The demo can be downloaded (as a Bit-torrent) from the Wings Of Prey sitehttp://www.airwargame.comOr get it from Gamers Hell as a single file for those who don't like Bit-torrent.http://www.gamershell.com/download_54548.shtmledit: There are also many HD videos on youtube which show off the excellent graphics too.http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type...es=20&uni=3


Matthew S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say this... If Austin were to implement the newest advanced OpenGL techniques, maybe it could happen down the line, however it has been stated on ben's blog they intend on keeping as many systems as possible running it, so I doubt they will amp the graphics that much, although it would be nice.Easy enough to say... however, is that GL is capable of doing most of what DX11 can do, and once Nvidia and ATI both have hardware tessellation, (ATI already does) for GL, then GL can match DX11 graphically. As for the direct compute layer, that could be switched to OpenCL (made by the same group as OpenGL), and that would be that. For the rest of it, well I could see GL keeping up with DX 11, it's more a matter of a little bit of lag because Nvidia needs to write that one part up for tessellation. Once that's done, you could probably do something that looks the same as dx11 with opengl with near future or existing tech. (I follow this stuff because the project I work on which is in my sig, uses GL to work on both windows and linux).As for tech wise, if Austin were to do it, he would KO a lot of older rigs, and that would tick a lot of people off, that's why X-Plane doesn't have True HDR yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wings Of Prey was released a few days ago. I believe this WWII combat sim has been derived from the classic IL2 Sturmovik.Why would this be of interest to X-Plane users? Well, check out the amazing dense autogen, sharp ground textures, excellent 3D models, HDR lighting, self shadowing (including cockpit shadows), water (waves and transparent shallows) and best clouds (including shadows and windscreen rain effects) I've ever seen. No blurries, no stutter, and absolutely fluid fps.Is it possible that XPlane 10 could implement some of the same graphics capabilities? Is OpenGL as capable?Even if you're not into combat sims this demo (1.2gb) is worth downloading just to see where PC graphics are heading. And this is all using DX9. What could DX11 be capable of?This is probably what FS11 could have looked like had it not been canceled.The demo can be downloaded (as a Bit-torrent) from the Wings Of Prey sitehttp://www.airwargame.comOr get it from Gamers Hell as a single file for those who don't like Bit-torrent.http://www.gamershell.com/download_54548.shtmledit: There are also many HD videos on youtube which show off the excellent graphics too.http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type...es=20&uni=3
Before you go goo goo gah gah over this, realize, the reason you get fluid frame rates in this game is you are limited in the area of the battlefield All your scenery is loaded so the sim doesn't have too continually load new scenery as you go further like FS and X-Plane does. As for detail scenery most is (albeit high resolution) repetitive farm textures, only small pockets are actually high detail/resolution scenery like Dover. FSX already is capable of doing all of this with it's 7cm texture capability. Just look at the work Orbx has done with this. Doing this detail globally would be resource prohibited. in hard drive space. You could probably produce a global set of textures like GEX at this resolution but they would still be generic type textures, and wouldn't look as good. This is the compromise sims like X-Plane and FSX make to cover the globe.

Thanks

Tom

My Youtube Videos!

http://www.youtube.com/user/tf51d

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Before you go goo goo gah gah over this, realize, the reason you get fluid frame rates in this game is you are limited in the area of the battlefield All your scenery is loaded so the sim doesn't have too continually load new scenery as you go further like FS and X-Plane does. As for detail scenery most is (albeit high resolution) repetitive farm textures, only small pockets are actually high detail/resolution scenery like Dover. FSX already is capable of doing all of this with it's 7cm texture capability. Just look at the work Orbx has done with this. Doing this detail globally would be resource prohibited. in hard drive space. You could probably produce a global set of textures like GEX at this resolution but they would still be generic type textures, and wouldn't look as good. This is the compromise sims like X-Plane and FSX make to cover the globe.
You really think FSX is as graphically advanced as Wings Of Prey? Dream on. :(

Matthew S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Before you go goo goo gah gah over this, realize, the reason you get fluid frame rates in this game is you are limited in the area of the battlefield All your scenery is loaded so the sim doesn't have too continually load new scenery as you go further like FS and X-Plane does. As for detail scenery most is (albeit high resolution) repetitive farm textures, only small pockets are actually high detail/resolution scenery like Dover. FSX already is capable of doing all of this with it's 7cm texture capability. Just look at the work Orbx has done with this. Doing this detail globally would be resource prohibited. in hard drive space. You could probably produce a global set of textures like GEX at this resolution but they would still be generic type textures, and wouldn't look as good. This is the compromise sims like X-Plane and FSX make to cover the globe.
I have to side with tf51d on this issue, we have all heard the comments years ago: Why can

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You really think FSX is as graphically advanced as Wings Of Prey? Dream on. :(
If you compare the screen shots in the screen shot forum I did of fsx 7cm scenery with Wings of Prey-I would say yes-I'd even give the reality of looks edge to fsx.But then-both the 7cm scenery and Wings of Prey are limited geographic areas. Doing a worldwide sim, at least right now, is a whole other deal.But I haven't had so much fun as I have with Wings of Prey in a long time. It is super well done, the atmospherics are great, and yes the graphics are amazing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you compare the screen shots in the screen shot forum I did of fsx 7cm scenery with Wings of Prey-I would say yes-I'd even give the reality of looks edge to fsx.But then-both the 7cm scenery and Wings of Prey are limited geographic areas. Doing a worldwide sim, at least right now, is a whole other deal.But I haven't had so much fun as I have with Wings of Prey in a long time. It is super well done, the atmospherics are great, and yes the graphics are amazing!
Even if the 7cm textures of Orbx Tamworth airport look a little more realistic than the "generic" textures of Wings Of Prey, how does that make FSX graphically more advanced than W.O.P?Do you really think 2006 FSX can compete with 2009/10 W.O.P in graphics department? W.O.P is far more advanced, just look at the clouds/shadows/rain/prop disks/lighting/effects etc, all at high FPS, no stutter, no "blurries".Come on, credit where credit is due!

Matthew S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well proof is in the pudding! In addition to Geof's pics, take a look at the Orbx videos especially the "BoB" video at Darrington, and the Tamworth one.
Very impressive!

Matthew S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Very impressive!
Well...............after seeing those Orbx video's, does this statement still apply? I don't think so!!!! :( "XP will continue to improve its capabilities whilst FSX is never going to. XP already is much better than FSX in many ways already!FSX is dead"I figure that as long as third parties continue to write for FSX, it will only keep improving. And this being an X-Plane forum, X-Plane is welcome to keep improving too!L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even if the 7cm textures of Orbx Tamworth airport look a little more realistic than the "generic" textures of Wings Of Prey, how does that make FSX graphically more advanced than W.O.P?Do you really think 2006 FSX can compete with 2009/10 W.O.P in graphics department? W.O.P is far more advanced, just look at the clouds/shadows/rain/prop disks/lighting/effects etc, all at high FPS, no stutter, no "blurries".Come on, credit where credit is due!
Mathew-I don't get stutters, blurries or any of that in fsx, but I do have a mid powerful machine.As more upgrade to the newest machines these complaints will be a thing of the past.Wings of Prey does have the clouds/shadows/rain/prop disks/lighting/effects--and it is great stuff for a game-though the rain is rather unrealistic it is fun.However, the sim starts and ends you in the air, has a very tiny small geographic area to fly in, basic ww2 aircraft with few instruments, a limited set of weather, etc. That is fine for a game, and allows a concentration of these graphic bits of fun.For a sim, it is more about the feature set. All these things you mention are nice-but if the core functions of what a simmer needs are not there-it remains a game. Graphics are nice if they serve these purposes. So far between sim savvy scenery for instance or the orbx stuff fsx still wins out over Wing of Prey for me-and comparing the 7cm stuff for fsx it wins out for sure. But Wings of Prey sure is fun!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mathew-I don't get stutters, blurries or any of that in fsx, but I do have a mid powerful machine.As more upgrade to the newest machines these complaints will be a thing of the past.Wings of Mercy does have the clouds/shadows/rain/prop disks/lighting/effects--and it is great stuff for a game-though the rain is rather unrealistic it is fun.However, the sim starts and ends you in the air, has a very tiny small geographic area to fly in, basic ww2 aircraft with few instruments, a limited set of weather, etc. That is fine for a game, and allows a concentration of these graphic bits of fun.For a sim, it is more about the feature set. All these things you mention are nice-but if the core functions of what a simmer needs are not there-it remains a game. Graphics are nice if they serve these purposes. So far between sim savvy scenery for instance or the orbx stuff fsx still wins out over Wing of Prey for me-and comparing the 7cm stuff for fsx it wins out for sure. But Wings of Prey sure is fun!
Yes, my post was about the graphics capabilities and not GA sim aspects since W.O.P is a "combat sim" and not GA like FSX. Btw you can takeoff and land even in the demo. Takeoff is option at start of mission and landing is a secondary mission goal after completing the primary.
Well...............after seeing those Orbx video's, does this statement still apply? I don't think so!!!! :( "XP will continue to improve its capabilities whilst FSX is never going to. XP already is much better than FSX in many ways already!FSX is dead"I figure that as long as third parties continue to write for FSX, it will only keep improving. And this being an X-Plane forum, X-Plane is welcome to keep improving too!
I am talking about the "core" platforms and not how 3rd parties extend the "core". What I said still applies, the "core" platform of FSX is 2006 tech and cannot evolve to take advantage of new GPU tech (eg DX11) because ACES no longer exists to update the core to support DX11 etc.

Matthew S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, my post was about the graphics capabilities and not GA sim aspects since W.O.P is a "combat sim" and not GA like FSX. Btw you can takeoff and land even in the demo. Takeoff is option at start of mission and landing is a secondary mission goal after completing the primary.I am talking about the "core" platforms and not how 3rd parties extend the "core". What I said still applies, the "core" platform of FSX is 2006 tech and cannot evolve to take advantage of new GPU tech (eg DX11) because ACES no longer exists to update the core to support DX11 etc.
Take a look at Phil Taylor's post in the FSX section about a review of ATI's Eyefinity technology, which included the games Crysis Warhead, GTA4, Need for Speed, Dirt 2, Left 4 Dead 2, and FSX. With an HD 5970 ATI card at a resolution of 5760x1200 (Of course spanning multiple monitors) FSX came in second in performance next to Left 4 Dead 2 with an average frame rate of 46.1fps and a high of 107FPS. This at settings Boom on, Aircraft Ultra High, Scenery High, Weather Ultra High, and Traffic High. Evidently this technology offloads work previously done in the CPU to the GPU! So that means FSX is no longer CPU bound, when used with these cards (ATI HD 5000 series). So while not a direct extension of the core, the effect is the same, performance wise at least!! All these games are Direct X, I'm not sure if it supports OpenGL apps, so X-Plane could benefit. It would be good if it could!!

Thanks

Tom

My Youtube Videos!

http://www.youtube.com/user/tf51d

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Yes, my post was about the graphics capabilities and not GA sim aspects since W.O.P is a "combat sim" and not GA like FSX. Btw you can takeoff and land even in the demo. Takeoff is option at start of mission and landing is a secondary mission goal after completing the primary."I sure haven't found that and I own the real thing-not the demo. When I end a mission I don't have the option to land and I don't have one to start. If you know how please let me know. There is also no free flight mode."I am talking about the "core" platforms and not how 3rd parties extend the "core". What I said still applies, the "core" platform of FSX is 2006 tech and cannot evolve to take advantage of new GPU tech (eg DX11) because ACES no longer exists to update the core to support DX11 etc."..and I keep talking about the end result. Yes the core of fsx won't evolve-but the core has much more to show, and 3rd party developers are only starting to explore it. So even though Wings of Prey is late 2009 I find 2006 fsx taken to its max ultimately more realistic for duplicating world wide scenery in a realistic fashion. I really don't care what year it was made-only what the end results are. I think a compare of the shots I posted in the screenshot forum bare this out. They are both great at what they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually hope XP10 doesn't look like wings of prey. I hate their green/yellow tint added for effect. It's lame imho. The texture res is actually less than FSX's (and I think current XP's) but the game looks nice because the tightly packed buildings and trees, as far as scenery goes. Yeah there are some neat damage effects. But all in all the flight modeling, interior and exterior graphics isn't anything too different from FSX or XP. Anyway, from what I've played in the demo, wings of prey seems to be pretty fun.What I'd love to see from XP10 is added ATC and better representations of stock airports, plus AI traffic.


| FAA ZMP |
| PPL ASEL |
| Windows 11 | MSI Z690 Tomahawk | 12700K 4.7GHz | MSI RTX 4080 | 32GB 5600 MHz DDR5 | 500GB Samsung 860 Evo SSD | 2x 2TB Samsung 970 Evo M.2 | EVGA 850W Gold | Corsair 5000X | HP G2 (VR) / LG 27" 1440p |

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...