To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
0 Responses
Pray tell, what relevance does a ground based simulation engine have to an airborne simulation product? what the developer claims as a `planetary` engine is nothing of the sort unless it ALSO replicates air masses, weather dynamics and of course, water. The blogger/developer mentions climate data, where is it?
While this might have potential does no-one consider the fps impact of fractal alogorithms running entirely on the GPU, when that GPU is also tasked with aircraft and weather display..? The load transients could cause massive fps fluctuations. Centimetric resolution implies both the very highest quality real-world data (which does not exist) and load-focus on the capabilities of the GPU. ACES could easily have re-targetted focus on the GPU but resisted. Wonder why?
While this might be an alternative it would need to convince by showing exponential – not logarithmic – increases in performance with increasingly powerful modern GPUs to be even considered for a future FS product engine.
Yes, so?
Impressive engine indeed. I’m not qualified to say if it’s ready for a technical flight sim or not, but the visual technology is certainly more advanced than FS visual engine IMHO.
Cheers
It looks impressive to me. If it doesn’t hold for a very complex flight sim, it could still be great for multiple vehicle sims similar to Armed Assault – the current state of the engine certainly reminds me of ArmA, and it looks prettier.
I’ll go along with “pretty”. I recall a few years (well, a couple of decades ago, in fact) when armies were looking for a good helicopter simulation. They took a “ground based simulation engine” and simply removed the “Stick this object to the terrain mesh” lines out of the code allowing the three and a halfth dimension (i.e. flight at varying altitudes with respect to terrain zero.
If I recall, it was so liked that airforces use similar engines for low level training.
Of course – if you put “military” anywhere in the budget, we’re all paying for it…
Oh, by the way – I didn’t see that army truck… in fact the video I see is a Cessna flying over a very central European scenery with FORESTS and LEAVES and GRASS…
Very pretty. And the rest of his work on Youtube.
But I wonder what Cody Jaggyroad would do with that. 😉