Little Details You Look For in a Sim?

[SirMike1983 3]

I've found that the more hardcore simmers tend to go in heavily on the historical accuracy details. But it seems everyone is a little different. What are the "little things" you look for to be accurate in a sim that really draw you into the game?

 

 

I tend to be big into the aircraft details and flight models, myself. I've played a number of sims over the years and found that often the in-cockpit details lack true accuracy. For example, Red Baron 2/3d stock out of the box seemed to have just a couple generic panels they used in the cockpit. Often they'd look nothing like the real thing. I think OFF has truly succeeded in this regard. I'm especially happy with the Nieuports and Spads. These planes used somewhat unorthodox cockpits and OFF really seems to have nailed them-- N.11,16,17; Spad 7, 13. With new aircraft on the way, I'm hoping the N.24 and the like continue that detail in the cockpit. I think they will-- good stuff on the way.

 

What do you look for in particular, besides basic realism on the whole?

[Olham 164]

Well, I like the Squadron/Jasta/Escadrille insignia details, and especially, that the aces' signs

were all done so individually. If you ever browse through the skins folder (use for example the

freeware "DXTBmp" - must google for it), you realise, how many individual skins these fellows

painted. It's incredible!

[OlPaint01 0]

Hello SirMike

 

Olham is right...The Devil is in the Details!. If you scan the Pilots Dossiers pages when deciding on a campaign you will find Hundreds of Squads/Esc/Jastas fighter and bomber pilot careers to chose from. You can see the war is broken down into periods of time for each and the Aces who were posted at the various aerodromes are maticulously recorded. You will also notice each squad has an authenticate Insignia displayed. Winder and the Devs have done an outstanding job making history come alive. I was so inspired by the simm as an historical document that I am in the process of researching and collecting the Pilot Dossiers information into a monster spread sheet as a reference document that can be easily scanned. I hope to update the Squadron Assignments chart that is now floating around the community and that is now out of date after the release of OFF:BHaH - phase 3. That revised chart will take all the quess work out of choosing a career that will not come to an abrupt end when the squadron is due for an A/C refit only to discover that craft is not a currently a part of the simm.

 

OlPaint01

[Red-Dog 3]

I'am with Olham, i've tried a bit of skining and i thought that i had done a good job after hours of work,but when you see how many and with what detail the one's in the sim have been done you can see why this is a labour of love to the devs.

Also i like the little writing on the tyre's.

[Olham 164]

Winder and the Devs have done an outstanding job making history come alive. I was so inspired by the simm as an historical document

 

Shredward is, I think, the "historical department", who contributed all this. See also his thread "On this day in the Great War".

[cptroyce 0]

I enjoy the detail in the terrain and scenery. The little things that make you feel that you are flying over a live landscape.

 

Royce

[griphos 0]

Speaking of the little writing on the "tyres" I've got a pic in the screenshots section of a Nupe which took off during rain and there's mud on it's tires. Gotta love that!

[UK_Widowmaker 571]

Well, from a personal point of view, I would have said mainly scenery...But now, the opportunity to make skins etc is, for me, one of the most important aspects, and something that gives me a great deal of pleasure, in that it adds something to the overall experience!

[RAF_Louvert 101]

Oh man, where to begin?! I like it all in this sim. The planes, the skins, the terrain, the weather, the missions, the campaigns, the historical details, the ability to customize...and I've barely gotten going with it all really. But if I had to choose one thing that I like best, it would be the dog "meowing" when you hit the start screen.

 

Cheers!

 

Lou

[Jammer28 0]

Oh man, where to begin?! I like it all in this sim. The planes, the skins, the terrain, the weather, the missions, the campaigns, the historical details, the ability to customize...and I've barely gotten going with it all really. But if I had to choose one thing that I like best, it would be the dog "meowing" when you hit the start screen.

 

Cheers!

 

Lou

 

I agree. It seems every so often I notice something that makes me say to myself, “Wow, will you look at that!” In one Camel there is a serial number (?) on the upper side of the top wing on the right. 

In the screenshot notice how there is dirt in front of the tents and the ends of the field. It shows the wear on the field from working and staging the aeroplanes as well as take offs and landings. 

Also at altitude the terrain doesn’t have that pattern look so many other sims have.

So many things.

 

[Olham 164]

Returning from a successful afternoon flight, I decided to approach our field at Eswars low.

I followed a river, and as I passed Eswars, I noticed marching German troops and vans.

I went very low, to see them closer, and I took this screenshot.

Very often, I see German tanks roll along the road to Eswars, towards the front.

[Hauksbee 103]

Yes! to all of the above...but the one detail that really knocks me out [and which I never would have expected] is the sounds of the airframe creaking and groaning around me. Many is the time when I've settled with my adversaries [i live in QC] I'll just keep flying, diving and zooming, pulling high-G turns, just to listen to the plane strain and flex around me. Especially if there's a nice, warm, dawn, or dusk, light. Sopwith Pups are my favorite. They make the best music.

[Dej 17]

There's no one thing to choose for me because all those little details to which so much attention has been paid, that you've all mentioned, add up to what clinches it for me - IMMERSION.

 

Wingmen that stick with you, save your ragged ass, increase their own scores, grow with you and then are killed leaving you with a genuine sense of loss - which I guess is favourite if I have to name something - wouldn't work if everything else didn't put it into context. And that point about context is true for all the other little details - it all adds up to an immersive whole.

 

I'm a roleplayer by preference and if a sim doesn't offer me that then eye-candy and exhilarating online combat - however good - counts for far less.

[The_Black_Knight 0]

Personally for me, its all about the aeroplane FMs.

As an engineer with a firm understanding of aerodynamics, engines, and advancements from this period, I have a tendency to evaluate each individual aircraft on its own merits.

If a Nieuport 24 can outturn or equal a Fokker DrI, you immediately have simulation problems.

Modeling flight characteristics of individual aeroplanes in conjunction with damage modeling is a tough nut to crack.

Not only do you need to understand the limitations of the era, but fundamentals in physics as well.

Thats why it was so sad to see MicroSoft's flight sim crew be disbanded.

Artists and modellers can do the graphics, but they cannot model the flight effectively.

OFF provides good realism within the limits of low airspeed stalls, but not power stalls.

Damage models are still a long way from realistic due to eyes on visibility damage.

However, this conversion has come a LONG way since its beginning.

Red Baron 3D highly tweaked FMs/DMs are the only ones superior at this time.

 

The_Black_Knight

[Hasse Wind 46]

For me the immersion is the most important thing. It is achieved almost perfectly in OFF. The flight models, cockpits, paints, squadron insignias, ranks, names, aces and all the historical stuff that puts the game in the right context. And one mustn't forget the sounds - the engine sounds in particular are so amazing in OFF that I never tire to listen to them. (I'm probably going to get some permanent hearing damage soon with my headphones and those realistic engine sound volumes. )

 

When I play sims, I want to be made to believe that I'm really there in the sim's world. This can't be done if the details I mentioned above aren't implemented well in the sim. I love the feeling I get in OFF that I'm just a very, very small part in the large machine of war that dominated Europe in those fateful years of 1914-1918. This wouldn't be possible without the campaign mode we have in OFF. OFF has all the details that made RB3D great, and then some. I expect things will be even better in the future when we get new planes and that new medal system, and maybe even something completely new which we haven't even dreamed about yet.

[Olham 164]

Black Knight - have you switched "aircraft resolution" (or how it's called in Workshop) on highest detail?

Cause then, you won't see damage. They look fine then, but I recommend to try the other way.

You will see bad damage.

[Bullethead 12]

Personally for me, its all about the aeroplane FMs.

As an engineer with a firm understanding of aerodynamics, engines, and advancements from this period, I have a tendency to evaluate each individual aircraft on its own merits.

If a Nieuport 24 can outturn or equal a Fokker DrI, you immediately have simulation problems.

 

The relative performance of the planes is very important to me, too, but I've never seen an N24 out-turn a DrI in OFF :).

 

I perhaps give the planes a bit more leeway than you do. After all, I've never flown any of them myself, so have only the subjective anecdotal evidence of WW1 pilot memoirs to go on. I trust the OFF team to be way more knowledgeable than I am in this matter, so I trust their judgment.

 

One thing to remember, however, is that I doubt very much that all real WW1 planes of the same type flew the same, or that the same plane flew the same way 2 days in a row. I can think of many reasons for this, ranging from as-built weight variations in the wooden structure, to daily weight changes due to local humidity, to differences in "tuning" the bracing wires. And then you've got the potential for battle damage before you even meet the enemy--maybe hit took an Archie fragment on the way over. Finally, it takes a good pilot to get the most out of his plane, and pilot quality varies considerably. Thus, the same plane in the hands of an ace will turn much tighter than when flown by a noob.

 

As a result, it seems to me that just getting the relative performances within the right ballpark is quite good enough. That would seem to be within the margin of error produced by all the above factors, especially the pilot quality thing. Thus, if on one day I'm able to out-turn a given type of enemy plane, but not on the next, I'm not going to complain. I figure the 2nd guy was just a better pilot :yes:

[NS13Jarhead 6]

I'm with Hasse Wind - IMMERSION!

 

A couple of months back I flew a balloon busting mission as "dash two" (flight lead's wingman) and as we approached the target, the flak started flying. Then all of a sudden "boom" a big cloud erupted in front of me, right on top of my flight lead, and he disappeared. As soon as that happened, all the hair on the back of my neck stood up. And for a brief moment, I felt as if I had just witnessed a real person's death. Now THAT'S immersion. Bravo, OBD