I once had a discussion here on this forum where I put forth my idea that a meaningful, enjoyable, and totally immersive WWI air combat simulation could even be acheived if the sim detailed the wartime experience of just one historical combat squadron during that war (such as Britain's No. 56 Squadron).

Now the land combat version of this idea is in the final stages of design. It's called Brothers In Arms, and it will simulate in the 1st-person perspective the historically based combat of one airborne rifle squad in just one campaign of WWII.

As the title's announcement appeared today at SimHQ, here's a snippet from the game's press release:

"The game puts you in the shoes of Sgt. Matt Baker, a D-Day paratrooper squad leader, and asks you to lead the squad as you balance their lives with the success of the mission. The true stories and historical events you experience on your perilous journey take you through real battlefields meticulously recreated from aerial reconnaissance images, US Army Signal Corps photos and eye-witness accounts of war-torn Normandy."

If you're interested, click on the game's webpage and access the screenshots, and then the Days counting-down to Baker's squad dropping onto French soil 1944, to set the stage for the game's experience.

http://www.brothersinarmsgame.com/d-0.asp

I've maintained here on this forum that air combat sims would do well to take some of their cues from today's 1st-person shooters, for they are often at the cutting edge in game development.

As one who's looking forward to flying "the most realistic and authentic" WWI sim yet, one that "will immerse gamers into the gritty, uncensored and emotionally-charged side of war", perhaps Brothers In Arms serves to illustrate what the future of combat air sims may one day also achieve.

Well, like any other game I would reserve judgement until I try it. It's only a press release. I don't think I've ever read an accurate press release yet.

Salute FlyXwire!
Thats some outstanding graphics!
We must be seeing DX9 finnaly in games, This would be cool if they could make a WW1 game like 1942 simm. I love FPS but they don`t like me, i can play flight simms and Nascar simms for hours. But everytime i play a FPS i get sea sick and almost loose my lunch. I was told this is a sign of a good game. LOL. So i have to stick with flight simms. Computers technology seems to be advancing faster and faster all the time. So game makers have alot of power and tools to create some killer games. Theses games are getting more life like all the time. It will be like stepping back in time with very historical and photo quaility action. Just think how far they have come from that game Pong that vedeo tinnis game lol.
Take Care!
Rooster

Photo quality action? To my eyes I don't think photo quality action will even happen in computer games in my lifetime, and I'm still on the young side of 40. Even the incredibly realistic computer graphics they use in films (ie Terminator 3) take months of rendering to produce and the real time rendering takes place at an incredibly slow rate. And that's just film quality, which doesn't even come anywhere close to photo quality in terms of granular resolution and optical clarity.

All I see when I look at those screenies is evolution - not revolution.

For some people that may be just ducky but for me in a combat flight sim it would be an unneccessary limitation.

Notice or guess at the target buyers of that RPG you mention. Play it maybe 3 times and buy the next thing that gets waved at you.

Please... there aren't enough good WWI sims out as it is. Game engine capable of as much scope as possible and gives the players more choice is far more preferable than a choked-down, tightly limited scope. If I want to play a member of a certain squad, I expect the campaign to support that thank you! It's been done if you haven't noticed. Perhaps the sims you've played most are weak in those areas?


Neal

For a title like "ultimate simulation" it would have to offer huge AI advances as well as other advances in the simulation of ballistics, wounds, movement, etc. Besides pretty pictures I didn't see anything that would distinguish it from the current crop of WWII shooters.

Exactly the response I expected...........

The title of this thread; Ultimate Simulation, is an oxymoron, because no simulation can ever approach an ultimate state of being.........that of truly replicating reality in it's fullest sense. However, this effort will always be the goal for game designers, that is to add ever more realistic appearing (add emotionally feeling), and authentically derived coverage into the content of future simulations.

The recently previewed shooter Brothers In Arms looks to be an example of this appoach to create high fidelity detail, and therefore ramp-up the level of immersion, not by focusing on the breadth of content but by the quality of selected content!

This is, and has been the essense of the quantity over quality debate here on this forum.

Quite to the contrary, a simulation is much more likely to reach the exhalted ability to suspend disbelief, through ever more exacted attention to detail, rather than through creating a "survey" of quatity of coverage. This is why the argument that a game cannot be a sim without so-and-so many aircraft modeled is so bogus, because the opposite will become true as the goal of providing greater coverage trumps the need to provide greater in-depth detail and therefore greater realism.

I wish I had a dollar everytime I heard that graphics and model detailing doesn't matter in simulations, because when I look outside I don't see a limited-palette, low-resolution, small-polygon world waiting for me..........that's not reality!

So why create a simulation that trades quality of detail (and this means flight and damage modeling detail too, and perhaps aircrew animation), for quantity of coverage?

To me simulation is all about sweating the details, and if you must limit your scope of content to do the job well...........then that's what you do...................IMO.

lol - I'm beginning to think that BvH was right when he talked about people advocating two aircraft and a grass strip - all modelled to highest fidelity . I did not read past posts that way but man your latest sure seems to come close.

Sorry, but I utterly and completely disagree. I would find such a product sterile and dull. My money would stay in my pocket.

There is a balance there somewhere. Would I want an initial release with 100 badly modelled aircraft? No. Would I want an initial release with a half dozen perfectly modelled aircraft? No. How about an initial release with 20, 30, or 40 very well modelled aircraft, and the promise of more to come ... ding ding ding!!!!!

Look at IL2 folks, it shows the way ...

Thank you Pat, well said.

Droops

Absolutely; Il-2 with a decent campaign interface... sigh.

I did actually email Oleg about the possibility of licensing the IL-2 code for a WWI game, but it was a no go. I've got some wonderful ideas for a campaign engine.

Actually, when I win the lottery, fancy teaming up Pat? You can do the AI, I'll do the campaign, contract the artwork out to Kess (how come every sim maker in the world hasn't been beating on his door since FCJ... beats me, it looks better than the KOE screenshots!).

Have you ever looked at the Battle of Britain AI code? It's meant to be the Best Ever, with the wonderful extra that it's available to the world.

Rob

..... the same question might be asked about Mark Dyson (Spindry), who has done some AMAZING 3D airframe and FM work.

LB

Oleg's been pretty adept at picking up talent from the community - I believe Gibbage, one of the most prolific & talented of the 3rd party Il-2 modellers, has been brought onboard for their latest projects. Seems very sensible to me - knowledge of the 3rd party community gives an excellent idea of the talents, productivity and indeed the ease with which one can work with other people. Much better guide to someone's value than any CV & interview process.

I remember Spin's work, it was very impressive - what became of his company in the end? Are they still making commercial 3rd party producst for Microsoft's sims?

Rob

Yeah, when I win the lottery too - suppose I had better start playing . Agree on the campaign interface of IL2 - it sucks. RB's was probably the best that I have seen although even that one could use a bit more.

Never did look at the BoB code. Really don't have the time to get into it and wouldn't have anything to use it on if I did. I do agree, however, that BoB has some of the best AI that I have seen in a flight sim. I'll be sure to look at it after we win our respective lotteries and start a gaming company .

I believe the BOB code was released with a legal restriction that it cannot be used commercially.
Osram will let me know if that is in error.

Don E.

Thank you Pat, because if you had been here from the beginning, then you would have know that this is what had been suggested all along, in addition to the modular release approach too, ala IL-2.

So congratulations for at least recognizing which way the wind blows!

As far as modeling a high-fidelity sim around only one historical aircraft or squadron, well it was merely to contrast that quality often trumps quantity, especially if additional survey aircraft are merely included to satisfy those who can't tollerate less than a hundred "toys" to play with without throwing a fit.

Now let's see who else has advocated a hundred planes minimum along with VH..........why you Droops:

Droops, to be consistent with what you preach, you need to go back and re-read your post man ... ding ding ding!!!

As far as innovating ideas...........

I'm glad you're finally convinced about the obsolescence of RB, maybe you can work some of your charm on the other old RB hold-overs here!

LOL!

looks like a troll to me...

LOL.........how droll!

Actually, the only contributor that had anything postive to add to this thread was US95th Capt Rooster...........thanks, and I appreciate your lack of negativity and your imagination Rooster.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled show! :rolleyes:

Umm, I have to point out a basic flaw in your analogy of the situation Fly. Brothers in Arms sounds like a blast. Play this one guy and get through the war. Lots of fun, like Jedi Outcast was.

But that same approach would SUCK in a flightsim and here is why:

In BIA you are Sgt. Matt Baker. You are a human. There's only one model of human. All your enemies are the same model. that's fine. You can carry different weapons but that is about it. If you jump in a tank or a plane, then what KIND of tank, what KIND of plane becomes extremely important. If you're a grunt with a gun, then great but you're basically a bipedal shooter.

If I had a flight sim where everyone flew one model of plane that would suck. If you gave them different loadouts so they had different firepowers, that would be only a tiny bit better.

Apples and Oranges my friend.

I will definately buy Brothers in Arms. I wouldn't by a flightsim that has barely any planes no matter how well they are modelled.

One thing great about IL2 is that just as I am getting tired of the planeset along come more planes. I haven't even flown half the planes in IL2 after over 2 years. I love that.

Immersiveness in a flight sim is not created the same way as immersiveness in a shooter.

That said, I would love it if there was more interaction with AI personalities at the aerodrome. wingmen, cooks, the CO etc. Pacific Strike did that wonderfully.

I love you too Fly *hug hug kiss kiss*