Sorry guy's .....

[womenfly2]

... but this is just way to cool not to show here.
Turn your speakers way up for this one!

[youtube]<object width="480" height="295"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5U-_8_97k7o&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5U-_8_97k7o&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="295"></embed></object>[/youtube]

Enjoy,
WF2

[Bullethead]

Just goes to show the truth of that old adage: The ultimate form of air superiority is a tank in the middle of the enemy's airfield.

[rabu]

I don't get it, what are you "sorry" about?

The ROF videos look really good, but pretty water and clouds don't make a good SIM, we shall se though.

[ivanmoe]

Hey, it includes 100% of the flyable aircraft in the game, and one AI model. :gossip:

[Angles1100]

Very impressive , i like things that go BOOM and its really done well .


cheers

[Olham54]

Look: fantastic! Sound: impressive, but should be worked on (artillery explosions in the open have a shorter, not so sharp, deep Thud with less reverb - I've served in the artillery, so I heard it).
Definitely promising for some future; the planes really shake near the explosions. They must still have quite a lot of work to do though, we still can't see serious dogfighting yet? And if they want to build an AI and all the Campaign data details, it may still be a long way for them. (Seeing this film-like reality, I wonder, what sort of rig will be able to handle the sum of all this?)

[cpirrmann]

Very good looking video. I'm almost certain my machine won't handle that kind of graphics. Also, as I've said before of what ROF is concentrating on, unless I'm on the ground watching (this is an air combat sim isn't it?) all this is useless from 5000 feet,like waving grass. Of course, by the time it comes out, I might have a powerful enough computer. I would like to see more air to air stuff personally.

[Aussie Pilot]

Very good looking video. I'm almost certain my machine won't handle that kind of graphics. Also, as I've said before of what ROF is concentrating on, unless I'm on the ground watching (this is an air combat sim isn't it?) all this is useless from 5000 feet,like waving grass. Of course, by the time it comes out, I might have a powerful enough computer. I would like to see more air to air stuff personally.

Yeah but imagine trying to takeoff while that is happening around you, now seeing that would be good.

But as everyone is saying, we'll need to win lotto to afford the rig needed to run this one.

[rabu]

They're thinking of the future with these specs, which is good planning, I just find it hard to imagine that it will be out this year, or even next year, unless they plan on only supporting multiplayer with a very dumbed down Single Player experience?

The lighting moving over the plane from the CP in the cloud video is pretty amazing, most believable I've ever seen, along with the clouds them selves, wonderful water reflections too. I hope they do go somewhere with this for SP as I'm not really into MP myself.

From their website (click):

Recommended technical requirements

Platform: PC
Processor: Core 2 Duo (Intel) 2.8 HGz
RAM : 3Gb
Hard disk: 6 Gb
Videocard: 512 Mb video RAM(GF9800 series or AMD ATI Radeon 4850 series)
Access to the Internet: At least 512 Kb/s
Operating system: Windows XP/Vista (Windows XP requirements can be a little bit less then listed above)
Support of 64-bit operating system is not guaranteed by developers

[ivanmoe]

I've read conflicting statements regarding what's included with the initial purchase, so I don't want to state anything too emphatically. For single-player, it may just include a "training-mode," with everything else online between the two flyable aircraft. Additional aircraft will be made available for sale online. Again, however, communication to the public by the developer has been very sporadic and uneven, so I'm not completely certain what will eventually emerge from those crazy kids.

[duck]

Bullethead- I'd say that the ultimate form of vulnerability is a tank in the middle of an A-10 airfield.

[Giant2111]

Bullethead- I'd say that the ultimate form of vulnerability is a tank in the middle of an A-10 airfield.

It`s just like the "egg and the hen"-thing. Who would have been there first?
:focus:

I was very impressed by the physics modeled in the video. For me it didn`t looked like artillery shelling, much more like a bombing raid. The other vids I have seen so far, looked promising, and the engine used, seemed very familiar. Could it be, that this is a enhanced version of the old IL-2 engine?
When will it be released?
If this is MP only(most), it will be a great honor for me, to fly with you guys out there.....Olham,OVS, Geier,me in one flight, as agressors, chasing the allies (Widow, MK2, Bullet, etc) over the trenches.....:Banane36:
Sounds funny

[Schwarzer Baron von Chlum]

The ROF videos look really good, but pretty water and clouds don't make a good SIM, we shall se though.

:amen:

[UK_Widowmaker]

Yeah...Nice movie...but is it a movie or a sim?...We shall see!

[Siggi]

It seems that a large number of people like to fly contextless eye-candy online duals.

Without a quality dynamic campaign RoF will be just another souless and uninspiring online drudge. Sure, the quality of the graphics and physics and DM and stuff will thrill for a while, but without a context to hold it all together it will eventually pale.

That's why RB2-3D was still going strong after IL2 had already started to wane.

Maybe, once it has all the planes AND a comprehensive online war, I'll buy it. Or once it's in a bargain-bin. Until then I'll continue to get my fix from OFF, a sim that has THE LOT.

[JohnGresham]

It seems that a large number of people like to fly contextless eye-candy online duals.

Without a quality dynamic campaign RoF will be just another souless and uninspiring online drudge. Sure, the quality of the graphics and physics and DM and stuff will thrill for a while, but without a context to hold it all together it will eventually pale.

That's why RB2-3D was still going strong after IL2 had already started to wane.

Maybe, once it has all the planes AND a comprehensive online war, I'll buy it. Or once it's in a bargain-bin. Until then I'll continue to get my fix from OFF, a sim that has THE LOT.

Spot on Siggi. The dynamic campagin was (for me) always the most mouth watering feature of Red Baron and Red Baron II/3d. Really gave you the opportunity to immerse yourself in your character, your squadrons and your missions and provided a great narrative.

[Bullethead]

(artillery explosions in the open have a shorter, not so sharp, deep Thud with less reverb - I've served in the artillery, so I heard it).

I'm an old cannon-cocker myself. I agree, the sound of the shelling was way too sharp. I've always likened arty impacts to more of a KRUUMMP than a Thud, though. Plus, the POV was close enough to some of those shellbursts that the KRUMMPP should have tapered out into an evil ZZZZHHHHH of all the shrapnel flying by. And the graphics of the explosion should have been dust and dirt, not black smoke .

[Olham54]

Bullet, you know the real thing, I assume - mine were exercising granades. I'll never forget the sound they did, when they passed us very closely, short before impact. I was on a 14 meter wooden watchtower, and it sounded, as if some giant had thrown complete washing machines through the air - a vibrating, "spiraling hiss and hum" sort of sound.
Down again, the officer told me, that only 3 weeks ago, a granade had come too short and slamed into an Unimog army van (luckily no one in there).
My knees began to feel rather wobbly - now he told me! (Lol!)

PS: but we shouldn't go on talking army here, I suppose...

[Angles1100]

I support O.F.F. , I support R.O.F. , I will support anybody who trys to bring me more WW1 flying goodness , I have plenty of room on my hard drive


cheers

[JFM]

I support O.F.F. , I support R.O.F. , I will support anybody who trys to bring me more WW1 flying goodness , I have plenty of room on my hard drive


cheers

I feel the same way. I have the room and the horsepower, so bring 'em on! And I agree that pretty water and clouds don't make a good sim, but they damn sure don't hurt.

[rabu]

I support O.F.F. , I support R.O.F. , I will support anybody who trys to bring me more WW1 flying goodness , I have plenty of room on my hard drive


cheers

I agree, am totally in favor of more quality WWI sims, just throwing my remarks into the pot.

[pilotsden]

i can hardly contain myself. 90 % of my missions are 500 feet or less so this will suite the boy's of 60 to a ''t''.
were ''EYE CANDY'' junkie's
PD

[arjdsm]

hi Pd, can you repeat that in plain englese so we all might understand?...

[pilotsden]

by flying low we get to see all of the eye candy.eg. blade's of grass if you may.
thus,the sim is a natural for us as this is where we spend most of our time;low and slow.
the boy's of 60 are online co-op flyer's only and never fly campaign mode but opt out for the missions i put together for them.
each to his own as there is joy for all in the flight sim world.
PD

[arjdsm]

oouh thank u wery much pd, i got it now and i guess i've been mistaken in some way so forgive my puppets ways cos my eyesight s not as good as they used to be so ill see u and ur boys as soon as u line up in my gunsights