PDA

View Full Version : Game is Unplayable


Tree_UK
03-31-2011, 09:32 AM
Obviously removed all the epilepsey filter - still no SLI despite Luthier saying it was the filter that was killing it.

Disabled SLI improved framerates a little, but FPS is still unplayable even on medium settings, getting between 8-25FPS.

Hardly a low end PC, check out my specs.

JG53Harti
03-31-2011, 09:33 AM
and your settings ?

JG52Krupi
03-31-2011, 09:39 AM
From experiance very few games have sli/xfire support at release, luthier has stared in the FAQ that they are already working on a solution and trying to find out what has stopped it working in the first place.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=19819

Just turn off your sli for the moment.

engarde
03-31-2011, 09:44 AM
Obviously removed all the epilepsey filter - still no SLI despite Luthier saying it was the filter that was killing it.

Disabled SLI improved framerates a little, but FPS is still unplayable even on medium settings, getting between 8-25FPS.

Hardly a low end PC, check out my specs.

ive been flying around for the last 24 hours, works just fine for me on medium settings for an i5, 4gb RAM, GTX275.

i've flown through the campaigns with little trouble.

your claim is laughable, I have the game and i just finished terrorising sunderlands in a 109, watching those smoke trails from the 20mm carve into them.

yes there are some problems to be ironed out, as was fully expected.

I work around them and am quietly confident the updates will address them in turn.

frankly, the thread title is plainly stupid. You sound like a spoilt child.

Summary?

HUSH TROLL !

TAKE YOUR NONSENSE AND BEGONE !

TheGrunch
03-31-2011, 09:54 AM
I also have the game playable at a slightly more modest spec than yours, Tree. As luthier said the only ones I needed to lower to get the game to a playable fps were Forest and Building Amount. How much VRAM do the two GTX285s have each?

synti
03-31-2011, 10:25 AM
ive been flying around for the last 24 hours, works just fine for me on medium settings for an i5, 4gb RAM, GTX275.

i've flown through the campaigns with little trouble.

your claim is laughable, I have the game and i just finished terrorising sunderlands in a 109, watching those smoke trails from the 20mm carve into them.

yes there are some problems to be ironed out, as was fully expected.

I work around them and am quietly confident the updates will address them in turn.

frankly, the thread title is plainly stupid. You sound like a spoilt child.

Summary?

HUSH TROLL !

TAKE YOUR NONSENSE AND BEGONE !

Spoilt child... well here´s another one complaining. The truth is that game was not ready for release. Performance wise it really isn´t what a finished product should look like. To me it seems like some kind of alpha-version. Sure it runs somewhat and doesn´t CTD all the time, but...that´s not enough. It stutters, frames rates skip back and forth and the game generally doesn´t look so good. Yes, it is a simulator. Yes, it is demanding for the CPU. But then, so is DCS A-10C and it works, smoothly.

And before you start questoning my settings and rig: It doesn´t matter what settings you use, it won´t fix the fundamental problems that this game has at the moment. It doesn´t perform, even remotely, like a finshed product should. You might gain a couple of FPS if you tweaked the hell out of config. files, but that´s not the point. The point is: You shouldn´t be tweaking! I didn´t pay 50 € to become a alpha-tester.


Please, test your products before final release.


Oh, and the rig is:

Phenom X4 II 965 BE (3,4Ghz)
5 GB RAM
GTX 570
Win 7 64 bit

klem
04-01-2011, 03:09 PM
My buddie is using a 285 too and has similar problems (he has 4 core 3.4GHz i7 and 6GB RAM).

It could be the VRAM. His card has 1GB, my GTX570 has 1.28GB and CoD is using every bit of mine. Of course it's faster too and my i7 is at 4GHz but neither of our CPUs are taxed more than around 60-70% on Core1, 30% core 2, 10-15% cores 3 & 4. My fps is 50-60 over water, 30-50 over land, on High settings with Grass off and Forest and Buildings at Medium (1680x 1050). So, probably the GPU.

But Luthier says there is still work to do on that.

Meusli
04-01-2011, 03:15 PM
Well I have similar specs to Tree (except half the memory and my card is a 4870x2) and my preformance is the same. This does not matter if I have it on everything low or high, I still get the same FPS.

lion737
04-01-2011, 03:45 PM
Yesterday the sim was unplayable for me. I tried everything with all settings at very low. My fps were between 1 and 22 with additional stuttering.

Today I found the hint, that 1 GB of VRAM is not enough for 1920*1200 for this sim. After going back to 1280*800 i could fly the first time: fps is now average at 35 and the stutter is almost gone.

So that is the major point everybody with "unplayable" conditions should check IMHO.

Tree_UK
04-01-2011, 03:54 PM
ive been flying around for the last 24 hours, works just fine for me on medium settings for an i5, 4gb RAM, GTX275.

i've flown through the campaigns with little trouble.

your claim is laughable, I have the game and i just finished terrorising sunderlands in a 109, watching those smoke trails from the 20mm carve into them.

yes there are some problems to be ironed out, as was fully expected.

I work around them and am quietly confident the updates will address them in turn.

frankly, the thread title is plainly stupid. You sound like a spoilt child.

Summary?

HUSH TROLL !



TAKE YOUR NONSENSE AND BEGONE !

This is a performance related thread, its not the playground thread for naughty little tarts, go and pull someone else's pigtails you muppet.

Buckie
04-01-2011, 04:42 PM
Today I found the hint, that 1 GB of VRAM is not enough for 1920*1200 for this sim. After going back to 1280*800 i could fly the first time: fps is now average at 35 and the stutter is almost gone.

.

if they could fix AA 1280x800 may look a little better but at the moment using a lower res with no AA looks really really bad.

Stukadriver
04-01-2011, 05:01 PM
I do not have the game, yet. I do plan to purchase it when it becomes available in the U.S. And I do want the CD version with the "Gold" or "Classic" or whatever it is called box. Reading all the comments, though, of problems in frame rates, detail issues, and the suggestions of how to fix by getting into the various program files, etc. does cause me to hesitate. I have been stuck with poor performing games and sims like many others and it is a frustrating, to say the least, event. One I don't wish to experience very often. I do think that the Maddox Team is one of the best and for that reason, I still will buy this game. BUT...I am no computer wizard and really do not dare to go into the config or other files to tweak anything. My experiences in doing so never seem to have happy endings. So...since they are working on the fixes right now, and the US version is not due out until April 19, does it seem logical to expect that many of these problems will be fixed by then and it will be "safe" to buy it then?

335th_GRAthos
04-01-2011, 05:21 PM
Since I gave up any hope of flying at resolutions 3072x and with three monitors without SLI support
I tried easier settings: Window mode 800x600 (my game does not allow for window 1024x768,
if anybody can give me a tip on how to fix this I would be eternaly gratefull (conf.ini change to 1024x768 end with a black screen))
=> SOLVED! I had to change the resolution of my desktop to 3840x1024 and then, in the game,
I was offered the option of windowed 1024x768 :-)

It looks like a very playable game on WinXP and DX9

unlimited fps (422fps)
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/1_422fps.JPG

Graphics are still amazing
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/1_Window800.JPG

Inside the cockpit constant 130fps
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/1_pass.JPG

The sun effects are magnificent, when the sun hits the
front window you are completely blind (here sun is on the side)
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/1_sun.JPG

These are my settings
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/1_Window800settings.JPG

This is good enough for me, especialy if I manage to get it 1024x768
while waiting for the SLI to be ready.

Excellent game, one step ahead of IL2FB and I am sure we will spend years of discussions with it!
...and 000s of dollars on new graphics cards as we go... :-D

Carosel43
04-01-2011, 05:38 PM
Sadly i cant play the game at all, i have misplaced and corrupted textures everywhere, its a total dogs dinner. its a real shame as the game looks brilliant but for these technical issues. I do accept that win xp and dx9 may be to blame, as the problems i have seen to only be suffered by people on xp. i would like to get win 7 but am unsure if the game is supported on win 7 64bit

Current specs:
Win Xp Mce SP2
AMD Athlon X2 7750 BE @ 2.7 Ghz
3.25Gb (4Gb installed, thanks win xp) DDR2 800Mhz
GTX 460

slm
04-01-2011, 09:03 PM
It would be very helpful if people that CAN play this game would mention how much RAM their gfx card has. It seems 1GB is not enough?

JG52Uther
04-01-2011, 09:16 PM
My specs are below,I can play it quite nicely on my 4850 1 GB card. Yes,I have fps drops, but it is in no way unplayable.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v299/JG52Uther/Bounced.jpg

Chivas
04-01-2011, 10:09 PM
Yesterday the sim was unplayable for me. I tried everything with all settings at very low. My fps were between 1 and 22 with additional stuttering.

Today I found the hint, that 1 GB of VRAM is not enough for 1920*1200 for this sim. After going back to 1280*800 i could fly the first time: fps is now average at 35 and the stutter is almost gone.

So that is the major point everybody with "unplayable" conditions should check IMHO.

I agree...turning down the resolution would be one of the first things I try. Personally I still get high quality graphics in other games when the resolution is lowered if I turn up AA and AF.

Baron
04-01-2011, 10:22 PM
This is a performance related thread, its not the playground thread for naughty little tarts, go and pull someone else's pigtails you muppet.


Well, the fact that u didnt mention ANY settings in your "observation" tells me that u in fact aint interested in fixing whatever problem u might have. Your just interested in taking another dump and saying "i told u so"...even when your wrong.

Big surprise there

Im getting an average of 35 fps in 6 vs 6 DF with a "lesser" machine than yours with everything on medium, not that it would intrest u. So clearly u are doing something wrong.

Extreme_One
04-01-2011, 10:50 PM
Unplayable here too at lowest settings.

I don't really think that playing in a tiny window on the middle of your desktop is a reasonable solution.

Anyway my new GFX card is arriving soon so I hope to have better luck.

Current system: Q6600 @ 2.6Ghz, 4Gb DDR2 800Mhz, GTS 8800 512Mb - New card is a HD 5870 1Gb so I hope to at least be able to play the game at low/med settings.

/me crosses fingers..

Meusli
04-01-2011, 10:54 PM
Well, the fact that u didnt mention ANY settings in your "observation" tells me that u in fact aint interested in fixing whatever problem u might have. Your just interested in taking another dump and saying "i told u so"...even when your wrong.

Big surprise there

Im getting an average of 35 fps in 6 vs 6 DF with a "lesser" machine than yours with everything on medium, not that it would intrest u. So clearly u are doing something wrong.

I know tree is the last person to trust/care about for the vast majority of you what he is saying is true. There are major performance issues with certain cards and processors, I seem to have both with the i7 and a 4870x2. I get low fps no matter what detail settings I choose or what config file adjustments I make.

kingpinda
04-01-2011, 11:11 PM
I can't read. *edit*

MD_Titus
04-02-2011, 12:20 AM
i will be curious to see how this plays on a c2d at 3.2ghz, 4 gig ram and a gtx280...

335th_GRAthos
04-02-2011, 01:07 AM
So now, I managed to get the 1024x768 window to work, the results look good and the fps, too:

WinXP and DX9 mode (Yeaah I know, old habits die hard...)

A significant decrease from the 433fps at 800x600 mode, now only 270fps! (I think I will survive the hit...)
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/CoD/2_270fps.JPG

Same picture with cockpit on, now "only" 162fps (mirror off) Notice the change of color of the sea due to

the cockpit
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/CoD/2_270cockpit162fps.JPG

Still the graphics quality is excellent!
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/CoD/2_Window1024.JPG

In dogfight, constant 130fps
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/CoD/2_pass.JPG

The sun effects are magnificent, when the sun hits the front window you are completely blind
(on the side)
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/CoD/2_sun.JPG

Also when the sun reflects on the front thick window from the rear, you also become blind
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/CoD/2_sun2.JPG

These are my settings
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/CoD/2_Window1024settings.JPG

Intercepting many bombers, the stuttering problems are gone (I had 2(two)fps flying 3072x768 before the

patch)
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/CoD/B_1.JPG

88fps inside the cockpit
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/CoD/B_2.JPG

130fps without cockpit - the thick armoured front glass makes a big difference (who needs a propeller?)
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/CoD/B_3.JPG

120fps external view
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/CoD/B_4.JPG

This is good enough for me, while waiting for SLI to get ready and the things Kalimba mentioned
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=20055&page=12

kalimba
It is very promising
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After reading hundreds of posts, and seeing actual FPS of 20 to 30 FPS over land and buildings in low

setting with average PCs reported by many players , I have to admit that if Luthier reaches his goals , we

are in for a good ride within few weeks:

1. Performance increase. Over terrain, the two things that slow things down the most are trees and

buildings. We are currently in final stages of testing optimized buildings that almost double the FPS over

London on a test machine.
Tree optimization is a little farther away. You will probably see changes in how trees are rendered, they’ll

take longer to appear over terrain, but once again, performance increase should be significant.
If everything tests correctly over the weekend, both of these should be released by early to mid next week.

2. Enhanced multicore support. The mode that we unfortunately were not able to finish in time is sending all

render to a dedicated CPU core. The mode is working but somewhat buggy. It easily doubles the FPS, and the

performance boost is especially noticeable in larger missions with lots of stuff going on.

So double + double should look good ! And add the SLI in the near future And maybe 64 bits...

Salute !

diveplane
04-02-2011, 02:36 AM
game code out the box is beyond poor , fail

need a great patch to fix this.

W0ef
04-02-2011, 12:44 PM
I must say Im rather dissapointed as well. I played all IL-2 sturmoviks ever since the first one got released and thought that this one couldn't be that bad, even after reading how lots of people suffer from problems.

I was wrong I'm sad to say. Pretty much everything about this game feels rushed. The very basic looking menus (sloppy would be a better word), lack of intro or movies, no dynamic campaign etc, reuse of the same basic music theme I can overlook. But the performance and total lack of any optimization can't in my opinion. In order for this game to run the settings have to be tuned down so much that when flying over land it actually manages to look worse then the first IL-2 that was released like what, 12 years ago? This on a quad core with 8 gigs of ram and a 8800 GTX (sure not the latest model but still a card that runs pretty much any new game fine on high or max settings)

I really really hope 1C games manages to fix this because I'm afraid they might otherwise be killing their own license. I for one cannot possibly recommend anyone to spend 50 Euros on this product and I feel kind of robbed myself right now.

Mind me, I always loved 1C and the money isn't the biggest issue, it's more the nasty taste running this game leaves in your mouth. The feeling you are playing a pre-alpha release.

Anyway, those were my two cents. I sincerely hope patches will be released very very soon or otherwise all CoD buyers will get a free copy of the next IL-2 game in order to compensate.

Peace out.

P.S. I hear people talking about a patch. I downloaded the game through steam and it is version 1.00.13820 , is this the latest version or am I missing something?

klem
04-02-2011, 01:10 PM
So now, I managed to get the 1024x768 window to work, the results look good and the fps, too:
..........

Why are you using such a naff resolution when you are getting those framerates? Kick it up to at lest 1280x1024 or 1680x1050 if you've widescreen.

A few 1680x1050 piccies here. Nothing special, just as they came in High settings but with Forest and Buildings set down to Medium. Taken from Sortie 2 of the Campaign, total 5 kills so far, 1 Do17 and 4 Stukas plus several damaged. :)

Also a couple of air shots, Spitfire MkIIa and some 109s just to show how nice they look.

Its not all bad news.

Urufu_Shinjiro
04-02-2011, 02:17 PM
I agree...turning down the resolution would be one of the first things I try. Personally I still get high quality graphics in other games when the resolution is lowered if I turn up AA and AF.

That would be great if I could figure out how to get AA and AF setting to make any difference.

Sauf
04-02-2011, 02:20 PM
That would be great if I could figure out how to get AA and AF setting to make any difference.

Lol Urufu, things are bad when the community helper needs help!

:-P

Buzzer
04-02-2011, 04:29 PM
Its a joke we have to turn down res to get decent fps.
CoD is the only game I can't run on my monitor's native res (1920*1200).
Even ARMAII has no problems with that.

Look at the amount of buildings and trees in FSX with 6158x1080res:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUSRV_tihR4

Really hoping they can fix this...fps is extremely important in sims...

Stuntie
04-02-2011, 08:41 PM
Unplayable at moment for me to.
With everything bar the plane itself set to low or very low I am getting 5-15 fps over water, and maybe 10 over land. And get the jerking slide show stutter. So it is not even smooth enough to fight in.

I don't have the most modern system (overdue an upgrade for sure) but it not that bad - it plays ROF and DCS A-10 fine.
I expected to have to drop stuff down quite a few pegs, but this bad even at very low is a bit of a kicker.
Looks like I'll be back to ROF till the patches come.

Quad Q6600 2.40GHz, 4Gb RAM, 2x NVidia 9600 GT SLI

thnp
04-02-2011, 09:01 PM
Unplayable here as well...
i7 Sandy Bridge (2,2ghz)
8gb DDR3 1333mhz
Raedon 5750 1gb DDR5
Intel SSD /w TRIM

Funny thing is that I don't really seem to get a big enough "performance drop" from Very Low settings to Very High..

Very low over land = maybe 10 FPS
Very high (everything maxed out) = around 5ish FPS...

Lenop
04-02-2011, 09:18 PM
Unplayable for me too. Also there seems no difference between low - high settings. No problems in any other games, including FSX and DCS A-10C.
Latest drivers ect.

i950@ 4,2 Ghz, 6 Gb 1600 cas 6, nVidia GTX280

Plt Off JRB Meaker
04-02-2011, 09:25 PM
Out of interest,what keyboard buttons are you pressing to give you this fps reading?

I have'nt checked before now as my game is running really well but I'd still like to check what fps I'm getting,thanks.

SacaSoh
04-02-2011, 10:00 PM
Out of interest,what keyboard buttons are you pressing to give you this fps reading?

I have'nt checked before now as my game is running really well but I'd still like to check what fps I'm getting,thanks.

Open console window (default Shift + TAB) and use "fps START SHOW" (without the quotation marks and using caps for the "START SHOW" part.

Tree_UK
04-02-2011, 10:11 PM
Ive tried everything I can, the best I can achieve is to dogfight over the see in quick missions, anything else is not possible, even the quick missions stutter.

There are also problems trying to set up controls, mulitplayer is just, er well broken. The game doesn't remember what skins you have selected, FMB only has one time of day. The AI is the worst AI I have ever seen in any game. The terrain even on the highest settings does not look as good as IL2. How on earth the dev's can claim that this game was beta tested is beyond me.
Ive thrown in the towel and asked Steam for a refund on the grounds that the game is not fit for purpose. Back to good old Il2 for me. Have fun chaps and good luck.

S! Tree

addman
04-02-2011, 10:27 PM
FMB only has one time of day.

Have you checked "View -> Mission Parameters"? Plenty of different "times of day" there LOL!

Back to good old Il2 for me. Have fun chaps and good luck. S! Tree

Does this mean we don't have to hear your rants on the CoD boards anymore? If so, good luck to you too!:grin:

Tree_UK
04-02-2011, 10:36 PM
Unfortunatley for all of us my 'rants' as you call them came to fruition. Good luck to you too. S!

Triggaaar
04-03-2011, 12:13 AM
The AI is the worst AI I have ever seen in any game.How can you judge the game if it's unplayable?

The terrain even on the highest settings does not look as good as IL2.That doesn't make any sense to me, I think it looks great, miles better than IL2.

Ive thrown in the towel and asked Steam for a refund on the grounds that the game is not fit for purpose. Back to good old Il2 for me. Have fun chaps and good luck.Good luck Steve. Try and enjoy IL2 for a few months before coming here to see how everyone's doing, you might then come back to a game that's ready.

Sasha
04-03-2011, 12:48 AM
It is horrible feedback at official Ubi forums:
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/8071032709/m/8981073819/p/1

They are almost ready to report Ubi to police for fraud commited at market... with unfinished product.

Just hope that "fanboys security" of this forum who did not allow anybody to analyse "Friday updates" are reading this...

SEE
04-03-2011, 02:46 AM
Apart from this forum, CoD has had a pretty severe pounding in the FlightSim community. I don't regret buying it and will occaisonally launch it for 1 v 1 over the Channel to get used to the various CEM/Weapons loadout features.

I'm OK with that and prepared to wait for the fixes but I feel sorry for the people with far better spec machines than I have who cannot even launch it and have only marginally better performance.

Ctrl E
04-03-2011, 03:05 AM
I have shelved it until there is SLI support. Sick of turning crossfire on and off all the time.

I think it looks beautiful. It's just not playable. I hope they sort it out and quick.

Plt Off JRB Meaker
04-03-2011, 08:13 AM
Thanks SacaSoh I appreciate you're help fella.

Skoshi Tiger
04-03-2011, 01:04 PM
X2 Not fit purpose. I get fed up with this it is clear that this product is unfinished and then you get some idiot (it runs fine on my rig) undermining what is the truth (check out steam forums) I don't know if this sort of thing will ever end with PC products, releasing half finished games, take their money and try and fix later attitude, you would not accept it if your brand new TV when you got it home could only get three channels to be told don't worry sir they are working on a fix. End of rant.

Considering we had 2 or so weeks of reviews from the Russian sim community I thought most people would have gone into the purchace fairly well informed about the issues. Performance has improved a lot with the recent patches. You have bought the sim, haven't you? What sort of spec computer do you have?

My modest rig plays the sim at a reasonable frame rate with most settings (except trees) at medium (Running at 1680*1050).

The difference between PC games and consoles is that there is so many different peices of hardware out there for PC that the developers just can't make one ideal configuration. It's been that way since PC games were invented.

If you bother to look around you may be able to find a way improve your frame rate. There are some very smart and helpful people on these forums. If you bother to stick around you will find that out!

Cheers!

Triggaaar
04-03-2011, 01:20 PM
I get fed up with this it is clear that this product is unfinished and then you get some idiot (it runs fine on my rig) undermining what is the truth (check out steam forums)I disagree with you about the truth, so you find our posts idiotic. Whatever.

I don't know if this sort of thing will ever end with PC products, releasing half finished games, take their money and try and fix later attitude, you would not accept it if your brand new TV when you got it home could only get three channels to be told don't worry sir they are working on a fix.Actually I would, if I was buying a tv that was better than any other tv I'd ever seen, and manufactured by a manufacturer that made my last tv and supported it so much that it was the best tv of all time.

I didn't get this game home to find out it wasn't finished, I knew it wouldn't be, because they made it clear.

BobTuck
04-03-2011, 01:31 PM
I disagree with you about the truth, so you find our posts idiotic. Whatever.

Actually I would, if I was buying a tv that was better than any other tv I'd ever seen, and manufactured by a manufacturer that made my last tv and supported it so much that it was the best tv of all time.

I didn't get this game home to find out it wasn't finished, I knew it wouldn't be, because they made it clear.

+1.

Spot on.

BobTuck.

bongodriver
04-03-2011, 01:33 PM
The point is that a new game can only be tested on whatever machines are available to the programmers, I can't believe people can't appreciate that simple fact, and if you have spent any ammount of time around computers you will know that each machine has its own quirks despite being of similar specs, so what...you want the dev teams to test on every conceivable variation of hardware first?......then we'd all end up bitching that the game isn't being released soon enough.....oh wait! that's already happened, like from the first moment SOW/COD was announced there are litteraly enough posts on untold number of flight sim forums 'when will it be released?' like that annoying kid in the car 'are we there yet?'

The TV analogy isn't quite the same thig is it, a TV doesn't have to cope with the random combination of hardware, it's just a TV.

Tree_UK
04-03-2011, 02:01 PM
I didn't get this game home to find out it wasn't finished, I knew it wouldn't be, because they made it clear.

I have to disagree with you on that one Trggaaar, the dev's didn't make it clear at all, in fact they did the reverse, they continued to ignore any requests to show in game footage, they showed video's that are not possible for anyone to replicate, and they made no annoucment before the Russian release that the game was broken. After release they then put the blame on Ubisoft for the Epilepsy filter that they also claimed was stopping SLI working, they quickly retracted the Ubisoft blame shortly afterwards and implied that the patch would fix SLI, obviously it doesn't. Add to that all the other issues it is more than clear that the Dev's fully understood that they were releasing a product that was not fit for purpose, in 2011 I believe that to be unacceptable.

bongodriver
04-03-2011, 02:16 PM
So lets make it clear then we are all paying to join a development project. NO I still do not think we should have to spend hours trying to get a new paid for full price product to work. Most of the people who are having problems including myself have well over recommended spec machines and we all know the problems created by different configured PC's that give the developers problems but I go back to my original comment we would not accept this on any other NEW product.

let's ask this one then, if having spent the money bothers you so much, considering it has been released for all of 4 days, perhaps anyone wanting to make sure they were purchasing a flawless and perfect product would wait untill some good reviews were available to help with the decision, just like when buying a TV, given that everyone has included in the general complaining that this seems to be the way all games are released (with early bugs) then why are you so surprised???? I suggest you have no one else to blame but yourselves for not being astute enough to wait a few months/years for the game to have received it's ultimate patch (because we all know the final patch fixes everything for everyone) and as an added bonus the cost may have come down by the too.

Triggaaar
04-03-2011, 02:34 PM
I have to disagree with you on that one Trggaaar, the dev's didn't make it clear at all, in fact they did the reverse, they continued to ignore any requests to show in game footage, they showed video's that are not possible for anyone to replicate, and they made no annoucment before the Russian release that the game was broken.We can argue about the details of what they said and when, but for simplicity let's face the fact that most people discussing this on this forum are not in Russia, and knew that there were problems before they bought the game. You simply cannot say that you bought the game outside of Russia and expected it to run without a problem. We knew about the epilepsy filter problem before it was released over here.

After release they then put the blame on Ubisoft for the Epilepsy filter that they also claimed was stopping SLI workingCan you post a link to where they actually said it was Ubisoft's fault? Because they said that they had to add the filter because the game failed Ubisoft's tests, but they didn't say that was Ubisoft's fault. I'm not sure where it went wrong with SLi - don't forget the epilepsy problem is not limited to the filter, they had already done other work to the sim to fix the epilepsy problem. But presumably they'll get SLi working.

Add to that all the other issues it is more than clear that the Dev's fully understood that they were releasing a product that was not fit for purpose, in 2011 I believe that to be unacceptable.If they were to say that this is the game, final version, never to be touched again, I would agree with you that it is not fit for purpose. The game clearly needs more work. As it is at the moment, I think it's pretty close to being playable for most people, with a few tweeks here and there, and a couple of patches in the nest few weeks. Remember that this hasn't even been released in the US yet.

In 2011, if you are only interested in games that work as they should from the moment they are released, I suggest you forget buying comabt flight sims. What decent combat flight sim worked like a dream from the moment it was released? IL2 didn't. RoF didn't.

You didn't even expect this to be released before 2013. Now that you know the game isn't good enough for you, why don't you just fight for a refund and leave this forum? What are you doing here, just enjoying the arguement? Surely you have better things to do. I'm here because I think this game will be great, and I want to learn how to get it to work well on my system and watch it develop. Would I prefer it to work as it should out of the box - yes, of course. How many developers in the world can offer that (in a ground-breaking combat flight sim)... none.

To be perfectly honest with you, if Oleg had said 5 years ago that they needed money to develop the sequel to IL2, and they were looking for people to prepay £30 for their copy 5 years in advance, I'd have paid. I don't really have any spare money at the moment, but you need to put it into perspecting. I've spent thousands of hours flying IL2, for the cost of a couple of meals out (ie, IL2 wasn't 1 release) which is great value in my eyes. So I've paid my £30, and even if it takes another year to get it working well, that's £30 well spent for me.

bongodriver
04-03-2011, 02:34 PM
I'm sure that both sides of the argument would claim the other just isn't 'getting it'

point is the complaining is getting tiresome, it's NOT constructive, making a bug report IS constructive, but accusing UBI, 1C etc of daylight robbery is petty, fine delete the game from your hard drive.....don't buy any UBI products ever again etc etc, yes perhaps I am a sad 'fanboi' and am unable to listen to the reasoned arguments of the complainers, but I too bought a game I don't feel is fully playable yet but I can deal with it and live with the consequences of my own actions.

Tree_UK
04-03-2011, 02:38 PM
let's ask this one then, if having spent the money bothers you so much, considering it has been released for all of 4 days, perhaps anyone wanting to make sure they were purchasing a flawless and perfect product would wait untill some good reviews were available to help with the decision, just like when buying a TV, given that everyone has included in the general complaining that this seems to be the way all games are released (with early bugs) then why are you so surprised???? I suggest you have no one else to blame but yourselves for not being astute enough to wait a few months/years for the game to have received it's ultimate patch (because we all know the final patch fixes everything for everyone) and as an added bonus the cost may have come down by the too.

Feel free to correct me If i am wrong, but after the problems that were highlighted via the Russian forums the blame was put squarely at the feet of the Epilepsy Filter, this once removed was supposed to fix the game and it was announced that the patch would be available to European market at the time of download, there was no mention about multi core not functioning correctly, no mention of multiplayer issues, no mention of graphical anomalies, no mention that SLI had never been tested, no mention of no 64bit support, No mention that you could fly through Tree's, No mention of FM and ballistic problems, and no mention that aircraft could fly about with a wing missing. The list of smaller unmentionables is even longer. I am not saying that this game is worthless, if it gets fixed it will be a massive step forward in terms of aircraft models and damage models, but to release the product in its current state surely has the potential to cause such a backlash against the Dev's that it will do far more harm than good, you only have to look at other forums to see that the backlash as already started. I really cannot imagine what politics were involved in releasing this product but they sure as hell misjudged the mood of the flight sim community.

bongodriver
04-03-2011, 02:43 PM
Yeah because the flight sim community is awash with choice after all, can barely move for high fidelity simulators being released every five seconds, I feel sorry for those console gamers......if flight sims keep getting released at this rate then console games will loose out on funding for development and be consigned to the history books.....

Triggaaar
04-03-2011, 05:08 PM
Feel free to correct me If i am wrong, but after the problems that were highlighted via the Russian forums the blame was put squarely at the feet of the Epilepsy Filter, this once removed was supposed to fix the gameHonestly Tree, hand on heart, you are wrong:
1) From the start, it was possible to play the Russian version with the epilepsy filter off, and even then everyone knew the game wasn't smooth and without issues.
2) The development team said they'd spent the last 3 months trying to sort out the epilepsy issue, and hadn't been working on optimising the game as they had expected to.

there was no mention about multi core not functioning correctly, no mention of multiplayer issues, no mention of graphical anomalies, no mention that SLI had never been tested, no mention of no 64bit support, No mention that you could fly through Tree's, No mention of FM and ballistic problems, and no mention that aircraft could fly about with a wing missing.All of this information was available before the game was released outside of Russia, because people on this forum were playing the game. Show us the posts where those people said there were no (or even only a few) issues with the game.

I am not saying that this game is worthless, if it gets fixed it will be a massive step forward in terms of aircraft models and damage models, but to release the product in its current state surely has the potential to cause such a backlash against the Dev's that it will do far more harm than goodWell that's the thing - the game has taken longer in development than the team expected, and presumably cost more, and they don't know how much they'd get back. So presumably they needed to release the game to get some money for it to continue. Is that ideal - obviously not. But this is the reality for a game like this.

It's just too early 4 days after release to be writing it off. It would be more interesting to know what it will be like in 2 or 3 months. Presumably you'd be delighted if it was in a good state to play in 3 months time?

klem
04-03-2011, 07:07 PM
Honestly Tree, hand on heart, you are wrong:
1) From the start, it was possible to play the Russian version with the epilepsy filter off, and even then everyone knew the game wasn't smooth and without issues.
2) The development team said they'd spent the last 3 months trying to sort out the epilepsy issue, and hadn't been working on optimising the game as they had expected to.

All of this information was available before the game was released outside of Russia, because people on this forum were playing the game. Show us the posts where those people said there were no (or even only a few) issues with the game.

Well that's the thing - the game has taken longer in development than the team expected, and presumably cost more, and they don't know how much they'd get back. So presumably they needed to release the game to get some money for it to continue. Is that ideal - obviously not. But this is the reality for a game like this.

It's just too early 4 days after release to be writing it off. It would be more interesting to know what it will be like in 2 or 3 months. Presumably you'd be delighted if it was in a good state to play in 3 months time?

+1

I don't really care about the current state of the game, given I and many others can fly it without much trouble. Basically it works on reasonable PCs. The things that are wrong are the tip of the product iceberg when you think about the amount if work that goes into a product like this.

It isn't right yet, its a shame but that's how it is. Was it released at £35 on purpose? I expected to pay £50 plus. Maybe money was the issue.

I would rather have it now the way it is now than wait another year. I am happy to report bugs and speed up the 'testing' effort if that's the way some people see it.

As some guys have said, where are you going to get a another new combat sim of the calibre this undoubtedly will be? It's overdue and buggy but if it wasn't available at all (like say MG went out of business for lack of money) where would you go for your next good combat sim? IL-2 is ok, with or without mods, but its dated and the FMs needed improving.

So, yes, its not right yet but if that bothers you, return it or turn it off until its better. If it cost you £35/$50 and you are saving for or buying a new rig then the game price is neither here nor there. In any case its a cheap investment for what it is going to be.

We get the message, now please stop bloating the threads that are trying to be constructive by dragging up the same old complaints. At least try to be constructive.

nearmiss
04-03-2011, 07:28 PM
1+

If we pay the 50 for it and it's not done.... so what

I'd pay the 50 just to participate and beta test it as long as it we have the developers attention.

We'll end up getting more of what we really want.

Afterall, the bar has been set very darned high to start from the developer. ---- maybe too high.

We have a release candidate of the BOB COD, and by darned I'm happy about it.

I'm already reading some good feedback, and it will get better.

NO sirs, I'm so glad we have a release and we don't have to read another year of groans and whines about a release date, when will it go gold,etc.

I'm not buying all the junk talk

Sasha
04-03-2011, 10:34 PM
Besides all these ufinished elements of game... there are some elements that will hardly be finished or improved.

Development team are simply not gifted to create landscape textures and visuals... basically it is hardly improved from Fogotten Battles time.

As game becomes available in Western Europe - it is more obvious that landscape is not at 2011 level... and simply doesn't look like Britain.
Also it seems very cartoonish (Flaming cliffs 2 or A-10 have more realistic landscapes...)

Contrary to that, there are many, many - very talented moders who made gorgeous looking maps for Il2-1946 and if we take a look at 20 best maps for Il2-1946 - none of them is made by official team.

Why is that army of amateur artists ignored by Oleg ?
Is there any chance that developers would give them support to improve existing textures or produce new maps ?

bongodriver
04-03-2011, 11:14 PM
Besides all these ufinished elements of game... there are some elements that will hardly be finished or improved.

Bold statement, what exactly do you imply will not be improved?

Development team are simply not gifted to create landscape textures and visuals... basically it is hardly improved from Fogotten Battles time.

by this insult to the devs one can assume you are a highly talented programmer? what is your portfolio I'd love to see some of your marvellous work

As game becomes available in Western Europe - it is more obvious that landscape is not at 2011 level... and simply doesn't look like Britain.
Also it seems very cartoonish (Flaming cliffs 2 or A-10 have more realistic landscapes...)

what, you mean DCS A-10, that game which was released as a beta, and Flaming cliffs 2, wasn't that a sequel to LOMAC (notorious for being a slideshow)
I'd love to play the version of forgotten battles you are playing, but from what I have seen ClOD kicks it's head in and rapes it's mother, it's a shame it won't be moddable.......just like IL2 wasn't meant to be moddable.

Space Communist
04-03-2011, 11:38 PM
*mindless drivel* basically it is hardly improved from Fogotten Battles time. *mindless drivel*

ahahahhahahahaaaaaahhaaaahahhahahahhahhahahhaahahh haaaahhahaahahahhhaahhahahahhahahahahahhahahahahah ahhaahhahahhhhahahhaaaaaahahahahahaahaha....

..phew, lemme just catch my... my brea...

...ahahhahahahahhahahhahhahahhahahhahhahahhahahhah ahahaaaaahahahaaahahahhahahhahhahahhahhahahhahhaha ahahhahhahhahaahahhaa...

...wow ok... I think I got that out. Yeah I would looove to see the futuristic moon-people version of FB that you possess.

robtek
04-03-2011, 11:42 PM
There is a saying that fits this topic, i believe:

(be positive and) Fly with the Eagles, or scratch with the chickens! :-D

Sasha
04-04-2011, 07:39 AM
by this insult to the devs one can assume you are a highly talented programmer? what is your portfolio I'd love to see some of your marvellous work




What insult ? This is business mate, selling professional product for money... and right of client is to judge the product that is offered.

The only insult here is - insult to Il-2 worldwide community that was lured to prepay unplayable product (Are you reading any other related forums except this one ? )

( To advertise your "new generation combat flight sim" without Force Feedback - that is insult.)

Regarding myself, I am not professional programmer - so why should I present my creations ?

If people say that of Toyota cars have technical problem - does it mean that they all make cars themselves ?
If You say in supermarket that egg is not good, does it mean that You are laying eggs ?

Talking about work, I would suggest to You to examine 10-20 latest map works at www.sas1946.com... made "in free time by amateur creators" and compare them to map versions of "professional full time employed team".

Being genius for combat flight mechanics and not for a land visuals - it is life fact, not an insult...

klem
04-04-2011, 08:30 AM
..............

As game becomes available in Western Europe - it is more obvious that landscape is not at 2011 level... and simply doesn't look like Britain.
Also it seems very cartoonish............................

I do agree with this. It is a bit Walt Disney and that is something we should press to be changed in time. It needs to be reduced in colour intensity and improved in general appearance to reduce that cartoon impression.

But that does not make it unplayable.

bongodriver
04-04-2011, 09:25 AM
What insult ?

this one Development team are simply not gifted

The only insult here is - insult to Il-2 worldwide community that was lured to prepay unplayable product (Are you reading any other related forums except this one ? )

just because you can't play it? are you saying YOU are the entire community? yes I read many different forums.

Talking about work, I would suggest to You to examine 10-20 latest map works at www.sas1946.com... made "in free time by amateur creators" and compare them to map versions of "professional full time employed team".

I know the SAS mod site well, downloaded plenty of stuff from there, more than qualifies me to make my arguments, and I am a modder myself (for a different sim) so I know the work that goes in to making mods, think about it this way 'mate' those map mods would be useless without the actual game to use them in.

andmcq
04-04-2011, 09:40 AM
The game is, for 90% of people, unplayable. Just because a very small portion of a very small community (the Sim based one) can play it doesn't mean that the game is playable...

This game will be fantastic, but atm for all intents and purposes it is unplayable.

bongodriver
04-04-2011, 09:47 AM
Where do folks get all these statistics from?

etzi
04-04-2011, 10:22 AM
Where do folks get all these statistics from?

Look @ amazon.de

http://www.amazon.de/IL-2-Sturmovik-Cliffs-of-Dover/dp/B004JM5C6W/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1301908780&sr=8-1

Almost all reviewers, even those who gave 3 stars and more can not play the game at this time.

norulz
04-04-2011, 10:35 AM
Game is pretty unplayable even on low settings where it looks far worse than "modernized" IL2 that could look great with self shadowing and curved turns in roads and rail-tracks.

This attitude is very bad for progress if devs get "offended" by people giving them the feedback they feel.

and yes... the picture is cartoonish. sorry to tell that colors in IL2 Birds of pray are more realistic... but that is my opinion. Maybe the devs are a bit color blind or something... nothing wrong with that either... but that is the result.

P.S. C2D @3GHz, 4GB RAM GT460, playing only maxed up settings (I don't want tweaks that make the game look really bad for FPS... I get offended myself by this approach).

And another thing... this whole "new from ground up engine" thing. It looks like "new dinner" by same cook. I don't think he doesn't try to be original and cook something new... but if it is all what he knows to do... chances are it will get to make same food like before.

And that is honest feed-back from a paying customer that expects improvement.

bongodriver
04-04-2011, 10:53 AM
I can't play it either at this time..........

Just what is you guys want? do you want to kill this sim?......really
so theres been a hiccup with the release.....big deal, it's not a unique story.

of course you are all entitled to feel whatever you want about this, but do you really need to let the world know that badly, yes perhaps I sound like a sycophant...a 'fanboi' etc etc, I just like flight sims and play every single one, and I am not affraid of progress, seriously there are people that are bitching because there is a version 4.11 of IL2, talk about sycophants who are affraid of change.

please, if you don't like this sim, then go away, get your money back, uninstall it and junk talk it all you want to your friend or anyone else who might be remotely interested, some people here are positive despite the problems but we are just labeled sycophants......the game is 5 f**king days old and apparently we are lifelong die hard fans? I want to support progress on this sim on this forum because it is the home forum, why don't you guys go find a jewish forum perhaps, then make a post denying the holocaust.......I have a feeling you will get a few disagreements.

etzi
04-04-2011, 10:57 AM
I can't play it either at this time..........

Just what is you guys want? do you want to kill this sim?......really
so theres been a hiccup with the release.....big deal, it's not a unique story.

of course you are all entitled to feel whatever you want about this, but do you really need to let the world know that badly, yes perhaps I sound like a sycophant...a 'fanboi' etc etc, I just like flight sims and play every single one, and I am not affraid of progress, seriously there are people that are bitching because there is a version 4.11 of IL2, talk about sycophants who are affraid of change.

please, if you don't like this sim, then go away, get your money back, uninstall it and junk talk it all you want to your friend or anyone else who might be remotely interested, some people here are positive despite the problems but we are just labeled sycophants......the game is 5 f**king days old and apparently we are lifelong die hard fans? I want to support progress on this sim on this forum because it is the home forum, why don't you guys go find a jewish forum perhaps, then make a post denying the holocaust.......I have a feeling you will get a few disagreements.

OMG

Once again you can not accept other opinions!

I'm not saying I want my money back. But criticism is welcome!

PS: Hard to believe, that you are a real commercial pilot. With this stubborn attitude, you had got kicked out of the company's qualifications tests of the German Lufthansa.

Wolf_Rider
04-04-2011, 11:04 AM
P.S. C2D @3GHz, 4GB RAM GT460, playing only maxed up settings (I don't want tweaks that make the game look really bad for FPS... I get offended myself by this approach).



turn grass off, building amount to low and forest to low... simple

klem
04-04-2011, 11:18 AM
.....................

P.S. C2D @3GHz, 4GB RAM GT460, playing only maxed up settings (I don't want tweaks that make the game look really bad for FPS... I get offended myself by this approach)....................

norulz, have you forgotten that Oleg said a long time ago that you would need a PC that runs IL-2 VERY WELL to run CoD at low settings. If you expect your PC to run CoD on Max settings you are deluding yourself. It won't.

I would suggest that you might get Medium settings out of your rig but perhaps not even that.

Example, I am fortunate enough to have had the money to buy a new rig recently. Its an i7 950@4GHz, 6Gb DDR3 RAM, EVGA GTX570 superclocked. I can run High settings with just Forest and Buildings turned down to Medium, AAx4 and AFx16. I get 35-50 fps over land (around Tangmere) and 45-60 fps over water. Just occasionally it drops to 25fps on a busy airfield. I didn't note the fps but in a 12xSpit vs 8x109 dogfight over water I didn't notice any stuttering etc. I also hosted this for 5 players, the rest remaining as AI, no problems my end although various rigs produced lower results, eg down to 25fps over water and lower over land, but everyone found it playable. Also see attached from the campaign.

We know there are improvements to be made which will help us all but I detect that some people are expecting too much of their current PCs. And yes I know there are anomalies where people with apparently the same or very simialr rigs get different results but as the game is the constant the difference must lie in their rigs or their PC/Game settings. I also haven't seen much in the way of truly objective results: Rig, Settings, fps under specific conditions.

A test track would be a good reference and we could do with a 'Benchmarks' Sticky under 'Performance threads' where people could post

EDIT: I just found a thread
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=19990
It still needs a reference benchmark like the IL-2 Black Death Track though.

System Spec
System settings (resolution etc)
Game Settings
Track used
fps results.

Heavily moderated of course and NO-ONE trolling or polluting it with opinions etc. Just plain benchmarks.

JG52Uther
04-04-2011, 11:22 AM
Took me about 5 years before I had the technology available to run il2 on perfect with everything maxed out.
I expect nothing different here.As it is,CoD is running nicely on my poor old computer,and even if I went out and bought a top of the range system today,I wouldn't expect it to run CoD on max.

bongodriver
04-04-2011, 11:30 AM
PS: Hard to believe, that you are a real commercial pilot. With this stubborn attitude, you had got kicked out of the company's qualifications tests of the German Lufthansa.

Yes it's a well known fact that the most important quality to being a pilot is mindless conformity, you are absolutely right, I would never qualify for Lufthansa or British airways, they have a strict policy, you must have a high education etc, I didn't have the best education, I just relied on my own stubborn dedication to finally end up where I am.

Look I am willing to appologize if I am becoming a bit insulting, I am the first to admit I get somewhat animated in any heated debate, some call it 'hot headed', but criticism as you call it is becoming petty and not constructive, people are bloating the forums with the same drivel, this will hurt the sim's development because people will be put off, the whole issue is being dealt with and it is being worked on fast, can you not at least agree with that? but in the short space of time it is taking the devs to work on the fix, there are people hell bent on slandering it.....making sure the world knows to saty away.......result, this sim dies and we are all left with arguing wether we prefer v 4.09 v4.10 0r v4.11 of il2.

Rattlehead
04-04-2011, 11:34 AM
We get the message, now please stop bloating the threads that are trying to be constructive by dragging up the same old complaints. At least try to be constructive.

Agreed.
Everyone is entitled to vent their frustrations for a while...after all there are some serious issues with the game as we're all aware, but ultimately we need to get over the disappointment and contribute as a community as best we can.
I believe in this sim and I believe the game will be everything we hoped it would be, given time.

It's not an ideal situation as things stand, but we cannot change the situation. We can only try to contribute and try to help make things better in the long run, for everybody.

etzi
04-04-2011, 11:35 AM
That's all true what you said, but the buyers have just expected more on release. Me too.

Nevertheless, I believe that CoD is going to be a brilliant simulation through the upcoming patches.

bongodriver
04-04-2011, 11:39 AM
That's the problem really, too many people expect but don't anticipate, it's a simple life skill, but everyone acts like spoiled children, crying because they wanted the shiny thing with bells on but didn't get it 'immediately'.

etzi
04-04-2011, 11:46 AM
It makes no sense to try to convert the users here.

Many of the buyers are also mainstream users, do not forget it. They expect a game that works.

RocketDog
04-04-2011, 12:01 PM
We know there are improvements to be made which will help us all but I detect that some people are expecting too much of their current PCs.

I think the killer problem that's winding people up (me included) is that other games seem able to produce the same sort of graphics quality as CloD on mid-range hardware, but at very much higher frame rates. For example, I have RoF on my i7 920 @ 3.8 HGz, 6GB RAM, GTX285 PC and it runs very smoothly. To get CloD to run at all I have to turn down so many graphics options that it looks very, very poor by comparison. It's OK over the sea, but the terrain is particularly disappointing with a massive performance hit even to get it looking like FS9. Basically, RoF knocks the spots off it.

Now it may be that there is something special going on in CloD that drags FPS down. However, I don't believe this to be the case. Some posters have claimed it's the advanced FM etc that drags down performance. But it can't be, because the CPU load from CloD is actually very light with most of the grunt of a quad-core CPU going unused. I think it's actually just very poor software design, and Luthier's post saying that they anticipate getting much better FPS out of future patches suggests that 1C themselves know that there are serious problems with it in its released state. But the name change from BoB to CloD suggests that 1C know they have little hope of delivering large aerial battles over land. Hardly an encouraging sign.

If it is just badly coded, and they can make the CPU lift some of the load off the GPU, then maybe it's recoverable as a worthwhile product. However, if people find that they need a top-end rig to even make it playable at all (rather than just to enable all the bells and whistles) then it's doomed. Negative reviews and word of mouth will kill it stone dead.

There's also a serious concern that even if it can be made to reach playable frame rates with decent graphics quality, the thing is still buggy as heck and will need a lot of work to become a decent product. There are already a number of idiotic design decisions made in the game that really need to be fixed. The acid green landscapes are deeply unattractive and look nothing like I see when I fly over England. How could they get that so wrong? The aircraft engine sounds are terrible - where is the growl of a Merlin? The QMB-type thingy it counterintuitive and seems designed to produced Bf 110s with RAF roundels etc. I have no idea why they went with what they have now rather than re-use the IL-2 QMB, or copy RoF's neat alternative. Why did they spend all that time modelling tanks we will never see in great detail when the landscape looks so poor? I could go on, but it's just dispiriting.

Overall, I have found CloD to be a serious disappointment. Perhaps because I had expected so much. It certainly does make me wonder exactly what they were up to all those years since what we have finally received is manifestly such a rushed job. RoF survived a rocky launch because they hadn't built up player expectations and because it was actually pretty playable from day 1 but just lacked content. CloD doesn't have that advantage. Unfortunately, the closest parallel to CloD so far is the ill-fated Silent Hunter 5. I really, really hope that ubi don't walk away from it after two patches as they did with SH5 and that it all comes right in the end. But so far it's not clear which way it will go. I have my fingers crossed.

Ho Hum.

bongodriver
04-04-2011, 12:01 PM
I dont want to convert anyone really, I am just trying my hardest to counter all the unreasonable aspects of the complaining.

buyers?....users? I wasn't aware of a difference, I bought the game (buyer) with the intention of using it (user), I also expect a game that works it's just I have the ability to realise it will eventually work.

Simply this, the resources to research this sim are blatantly obvious and within reach of everyone with a brain and at least 1 finger, assuming your money is your most precious resource and it is truly. then why was nobody able to do a bit of research before buying, it's a lot less effort that writing slanderous posts condemning this sim.

andrea78
04-04-2011, 12:02 PM
It makes no sense to try to convert the users here.

Many of the buyers are also mainstream users, do not forget it. They expect a game that works.

I added my personal consideration: even if it worked (and surely CoD will work, it is only a matter of time: patches and PC upgrades will come for most of us).... do you like graphics?

IMHO CoD does not seem a 2011 game: cockpit is great, as well as planes details, but the general impression is not great (i.e.WoP or DCS are significantly better)... It could be "ok" 15-25 FPS, but I like to be impressed when I enter in the cockpit...

bongodriver
04-04-2011, 12:06 PM
I really, really hope that ubi don't walk away from it after two patches as they did with SH5 and that it all comes right in the end. But so far it's not clear which way it will go. I have my fingers crossed.

they will have no choice if the sales are affected by all this type of criticism....thanks!

335th_GRAthos
04-04-2011, 12:50 PM
Well, I dislike the title of this thread and did not want to post here but, I see the discussion is going on.

There has been a big misunderstanding: This was never meant to be a game, this is a very hard core simulation.

You need to have been flying a few yeas IL2FB at full real levels and knowing the IL2FB conf.ini by heart in order to dare to load this "game" on your hard disk.

So how did such a hard core simulation become something which anybody can buy of the self and offload his frustration later, I do not understand.
Apparently, the original IL2 and subsequent versions sold approx 650.000 units in Russia and another 600.000 in the rest of the world
(numbers are not equal to users, I have 8 of the IL2FB and two of CoD but it still gives a good idea of the community).
This is a big community of hard core sim players and a market big enough to create a specialised "game" for.
Some 15years ago, I was looking at a Silicon Graphics Workstation demonstrating a flight simulator and had promised myself to buy one of these things one day.
Of course I didn't the price tag was USD$ 500.000 those days. So, I am happy I can pay 30-40-50 USD and have this game on my PC.

Somebody was kind enough (thanks!) to post a video of the complexity of getting an airplane off the ground in real settings.
This is what I am concened about and not how much is the impact on my fps when the windmills are turning in high resolutions or if many chimneys pop up smoke:

(I have problems to shoe the Youtube link, look at Sven's post in the thread below)
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=20466

As far as eye candy is concerned, there is a lot and everybody's hardware has extreme limitations.
You need to use GPU-Z to see how much the RAM of your GPUis used and you will know your limits (at least befor the next patch arrives).

To answer the title "This game is unplayable" yes, I believe you are right if you do not know how to open the conf.ini or do not know how to tune your graphics cards and PC
or have not being flying flight simulations in full real settings for a couple of years then, this game is not what you should be buying.
I do not want to step on anybody's toes here, it just that we need to be objective, this is not an easy game to load on your PC and play with it!
There have been a lot of games which had excellent graphics and were easy to setup and play (I recall my excellent experience with one of these Call of Duty 4 or 5 etc).
THIS ONE IS NOT

If on the other side, you know how to open the conf.ini, know how to tune your graphics cards and PC and have being flying flight simulations in full real settings
for a couple of years then, this game rocks and here is the proof below:

Finaly after three days of hard work testing the new setup under Win7 I noticed following interesting things
probably worthwhile sharing.

Yes, it is playable but your GPU must have lot's of memory!
Back in Christmas when I was buying my new GTX-570 with 1280Mb RAM I though the Nvidia guys had gone crazy.
I am happy now I kept that thought to myself.

Win7-64bit is a must, otherwise in WinXP you will be stuck to run the game at 640x480 kai 800x600 resolution (maybe also 1024x768 )

Sorry the photos are big because my desktop has 3840x1024 resolution (three monitors) and the game runs in the middle window at 1280x1024.
At the far right are the interesting stats on CPU and GPU workload:

#1 The game appears to be using nicely many CPUs, I have Process Affinity=6 (using cores 1+2 out of the four 0,1,2,3)
the system runs very smoothly and total CPU usage is 30% (whereas WinXP had only 13%).
So, thanks to Win7-64 the CPU doubled, this is good news! :-)
It is a bit surprising though as it conflicts with the statement that the game poorly support multiple-cores.
You will see that the CPU usage is very evenly spread around the four cores, I am also surprised myself.

#2 The less good news is the consumption of GPU memory. The freeware GPU-Z is an excellent way to monitor this in real time.
Here GPU-Z shows the results of the first GTX-570 (the second being idle).
The most important is in the middle of the GPU-Z window, the Memory Used
Above the sea, 1280x1024 Memory Used is 959Mb RAM :excl:
Above land, 1128Mb RAM :excl: :excl:
MY GPU has 1280Gb RAM so it can still run smoothly but if the GPU has less then problems will start and you will have
to lower the resolution or the quality (grass, roads, shadows, etc, etc).

Mission 1, bombers intercept with 12 airplanes in the air
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/CoD/CoD_3840x1024_1280x1024.JPG

Quick mission over land with 6 airplanes
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/CoD/CoD_3840x1024_1280x1024_b.JPG


I must underline that I am more interesting in flying dogfight than enjoying eye-candy;
The new game has endless capabilities in graphics and it is definitively very heavy for most graphics cards available today
(at least until the next patch arrives) but I do not care that much; if I wanted nice graphics I could have been flying MS FSX four years earlier...
What I find very annoying on the other side though is the unconfirmed information that AI can see through thick clouds
(they had promised us they would fix this in the IL2FB days, it will be a major issue if they did not) -
I can not confirm as I have not tested it yet myself - too busy trimming my rig.

Using GPU-Z you can easily check whether you reached the limits of your system, watching Memory Used and Memory Controller load.
I hope this helps somebody, especialy those who start frustrated "my resolution is 1600x... the game is unplayable" types of threads

~S~

resolution: 1280x1024
anti aliasing: 0x (I get very bad errors when I try to raise AA)
Epilepsy: Off
Model: high
building: very low
land:medium
forest: off
effects:high
damage decals:high
buildings:low
land shading: low
grass: on
shadows: on
roads: on
__________________________________________________ ___________
Look also at my post at
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=19777&page=3
for the performance on 800x and 1024x under WinXP.

Also look at Skinny's post http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=20438



Sorry for being too long but, we should get a bit more mature dealing with this and all new buyers
who did not know where they were stepping into the hard core simulation field have my full sympathy!


~S~

norulz
04-04-2011, 03:48 PM
norulz, have you forgotten that Oleg said a long time ago that you would need a PC that runs IL-2 VERY WELL to run CoD at low settings. If you expect your PC to run CoD on Max settings you are deluding yourself. It won't.

You don't need a Core 2 Duo at 3GHz 4GB of RAM (which IL2 cannot even address) nor a GT460 tu run IL2 at absolute best settings.

This is a screenshot at low settings (and poor FPS) from the wonder CloD, tell me... you rather play IL-2 1946 or this... you give it a name.

http://i52.tinypic.com/2uek9d1.jpg


If you say I should expect under 30FPS for that garbage quality at my rig because IL-2 that looks 1000 times better runs OK on it... you loose me as debate partner.


P.S> This level of quality should had not existed in CloD... it's simply shameful. period!

Triggaaar
04-04-2011, 04:55 PM
The only insult here is - insult to Il-2 worldwide community that was lured to prepay unplayable product (Are you reading any other related forums except this one ? )No, I'm not reading other foruns, I'm playing the game. I thought it was running on my PC pretty nicely, but if what you say is true, and that people on another forum say it's unplayable, well I guess I must be mistaken.

RocketDog
04-04-2011, 05:21 PM
This is a screenshot at low settings (and poor FPS) from the wonder CloD, tell me... you rather play IL-2 1946 or this... you give it a name.


That really is a quite remarkable shade of green :rolleyes:.

Triggaaar
04-04-2011, 05:27 PM
For example, I have RoF on my i7 920 @ 3.8 HGz, 6GB RAM, GTX285 PC and it runs very smoothly.I don't have RoF, but I understand that it ran poorly when it was released.

But the name change from BoB to CloD suggests that 1C know they have little hope of delivering large aerial battles over land. Hardly an encouraging sign.Are you trying to be witty? You're not are you - you're suggesting that the change in name is because the developers couldn't get the game as optimised as they'd hoped. Wow, even for this forum that's some imagination you have. It's still called Battle if Britain in Russia isn't it? Maybe they can have battles over land but we can't.

GloDark7
04-04-2011, 05:40 PM
This game does indeed become playable with some tweaking.

If you don't mind abandoning your monitors native resolution, discarding anti-ailiasing and disabling half the terrain detail.

Yep, playable, but ugly as a bag of spanners...

Il2Pongo
04-04-2011, 06:08 PM
he had to accept that the game, despite his best efforts has issues.

Imagine if the devs could have concentrated on what matters in this game instead of all the "that lorry drivers hat was introduced in 1944!"
and
London bridge was this colour in 1940 not that colour
and
that shade of green has never existed in england!
and
that kind of tree doesn't grow beside river's


LOL

The engine has issues. It is obviously a big disappointment for the devs, for Oleg, for all of us.

But for Tree its heaven!
HEAVEN
HEAVEN ON A STICK WITH BUTTER

THE GAME HAS ISSUES!
tree tried to save us, to fix the game, but he couldn't do it because we just didn't love tree enough. lol

David Hayward
04-04-2011, 06:41 PM
he had to accept that the game, despite his best efforts has issues.

Imagine if the devs could have concentrated on what matters in this game instead of all the "that lorry drivers hat was introduced in 1944!"
and
London bridge was this colour in 1940 not that colour
and
that shade of green has never existed in england!
and
that kind of tree doesn't grow beside river's


LOL

The engine has issues. It is obviously a big disappointment for the devs, for Oleg, for all of us.

But for Tree its heaven!
HEAVEN
HEAVEN ON A STICK WITH BUTTER

THE GAME HAS ISSUES!
tree tried to save us, to fix the game, but he couldn't do it because we just didn't love tree enough. lol

heh...

+1

nearmiss
04-04-2011, 08:27 PM
Working yourselves into a corner, are you?

Go do the IL2 with TD upgrades... very excellent. The BOB COD will be a quantum leap better.

335 Grathos nailed it above.

Think of it like this, it is not a gamers game. Configuration and setup has always been an issue with IL2, why should BOB COD be any different. All of us, that have been with IL2 know. It is what we expect. Many of us has stated as much. The issues may persist for a month or more after initial release. All the users with their hot systems, and not so hot systems will have to tweak their systems for best use of BOB COD.

Just getting the key commands, setup with HOTAS is time consuming and mostly trial and error. You can literally spend several days trying to get the HOTAS setup, and then it can vary between Online and Offline play. LOL

It is the nature of the beast. If you must have plug n play, you need to be console player.

Calling BOB COD a game really doesn't describe it, except to say it is sold as one. The elements of what most gamers look for in a game don't exist.

I recall many times I've been involved in air combat. The action and immersion were so real my heart was actually pounding like my life was in peril.
I have never been affected like that by any game and certainly not a console game.

335th_GRAthos
04-04-2011, 09:57 PM
Excellent News on this post (first post of second page):
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=20472&page=2


I recall many times I've been involved in air combat. The action and immersion were so real my heart was actually pounding like my life was in peril.

+1, unforgetable experience


Jumping on the subject of this thread but with Good in mind, since you mentioned the HOTAS ordeal, the easiest way is to directly edit your confuser.ini (if you have not done it already, of course) It is a two-way process:
#1. Open a backup confuser.ini from now on "original.confuser"
Record your joysticks' (I have three) keystrokes on a neutral location (in my case, it is the change player commands or something like that, by default it is the keystrokes ALT-1, ALT-2, ALT-3, ALT-4. Exit the game so that everything is written on the confuser.ini from now on "confuser"
In "original.confuser" you can text search for ALT-1. Now you know where your new keystrokes will be saved in the confuser
Create a list of the names of your joysticks' keys.

#2. Open confuser and manually edit (add) the keystrokes to the functions you want.
The nice thing is that you can keep the old keystrokes AND ADD the new keystrokes as well. It is like the old IL2FB that could accept two different keys for the same command; I was very annoyed when I could not do the same in CoD (until I realised that the New command kept the old keystrokes and created an additional). And I was very happy when I saw I could do it directly on the confuser.ini :-)

~S~

klem
04-04-2011, 11:14 PM
You don't need a Core 2 Duo at 3GHz 4GB of RAM (which IL2 cannot even address) nor a GT460 tu run IL2 at absolute best settings.

This is a screenshot at low settings (and poor FPS) from the wonder CloD, tell me... you rather play IL-2 1946 or this... you give it a name.

http://i52.tinypic.com/2uek9d1.jpg


If you say I should expect under 30FPS for that garbage quality at my rig because IL-2 that looks 1000 times better runs OK on it... you loose me as debate partner.


P.S> This level of quality should had not existed in CloD... it's simply shameful. period!

I was trying to make the point that High settings appear to need a realy good PC, well GPU at least, after you said:

"P.S. C2D @3GHz, 4GB RAM GT460, playing only maxed up settings (I don't want tweaks that make the game look really bad for FPS... I get offended myself by this approach)."

I meant that if you want to insist on Max settings and not try say Medium I think you'll be disappointed. I don't expect that on mine although I hope MG will improve things for all of us. btw that low level of detail (I haven't tried it) was presumably to accommodate the older PCs (the basic spec AMD3800+ etc) so that more people could play it rather than be left out.

However, if you are not even getting 30fps from Low settings with that screenshot there's clearly something wrong because I have friends with similar CPU and older 512Mb GPUs that get better performance than that. How about the settings in your Nvidia control panel, are they demanding high AA / AF in Default mode (I don't think there's a profile for CoD yet). Just some thoughts.

You might want to look at the CPU and GPU loading to see if there's a clue there plus all the usual IL-2 stuff about background services etc.

kaisey
04-05-2011, 01:59 AM
Tree, where do you get your info from?? I am running 64bit and unsupported GFX card Nvidia 8600gt (according to box) and i can run game, sure the frame rate is not good but like most ppl here you can see the potential and we are prepared to wait

norulz
04-05-2011, 08:16 AM
@Klem

I get even 40FPS in that shot but to what purpose? The game looks like...

If you make the game to look a bit better in some aspects than IL2 1946 it gets utterly unplayable.

Yesterday I was chatting with a squad mate that lives in UK and he said: "I have I7 @ over 3GHz, 12GB of ram, a GT580 combined with a gt460, win 7 64, etc... and besides getting low FPS (around 30) at max settings (1920x1080) I get continuous and annoying stutters and when I get over London is finished... game over... under 10FPS." His satisfaction was in negative numbers...

Tvrdi
04-05-2011, 08:21 AM
This is really disturbing...I have i7920@3.5Ghz, MSI Twin Frozr2 GTX470 (OC to 750 Mhz on core) and 6GIGS of RAM, x-fi gamer, Win7 64bit....and even on med with low trees and buildings I have barely playable COD. With one plane in the air. Over sea. Sometimes its almost slide show.
Putting aside that game is released unoptimised....Will they EVER optimise this sim? Or this wil be an epic fail?

On top of everything AA is not working, sound of MG guns is too loud, external sounds are IL2 stock sounds of BF109.......is this april fools?

JG52Uther
04-05-2011, 08:26 AM
Weird,its running much better than that for me Tvrdi. Have you looked at all the optimisation threads here for tips on how to tweak your computer?

Tvrdi
04-05-2011, 08:31 AM
Weird,its running much better than that for me Tvrdi. Have you looked at all the optimisation threads here for tips on how to tweak your computer?

TBH I did what I know from my experience with sims and as beta tester....Will try to find something....is there a config.ini optimisation guide?

janpitor
04-05-2011, 08:35 AM
This is really disturbing...I have i7920@3.5Ghz, MSI Twin Frozr2 GTX470 (OC to 750 Mhz on core) and 6GIGS of RAM, x-fi gamer, Win7 64bit....and even on med with low trees and buildings I have barely playable COD. With one plane in the air. Over sea. Sometimes its almost slide show.
Putting aside that game is released unoptimised....Will they EVER optimise this sim? Or this wil be an epic fail?

On top of everything AA is not working, sound of MG guns is too loud, external sounds are IL2 stock sounds of BF109.......is this april fools?

I had also the too loud mgs problem. Set your sound setting to binaural...that will work...otherwise same performance problems here

Tvrdi
04-05-2011, 08:39 AM
tnx Janpitor....

btw, Rise Of Flight, which had simmilar performance/optimisation problems at the release is now optimised pretty well (apart from some graphic glitches)...so thers a hope for COD....

etzi
04-05-2011, 08:43 AM
tnx Janpitor....

btw, Rise Of Flight, which had simmilar performance/optimisation problems at the release is now optimised pretty well (apart from some graphic glitches)...so thers a hope for COD....

Nope,

i have RoF since release. It was never run as bad as Cliffs of Dover upon release (no stuttering, multi-CPU support from the start and so on).

I am patient and give CoD time, but nevertheless I am a little pessimistic.

Tvrdi
04-05-2011, 08:45 AM
Nope,

i have RoF since release. It was never run as bad as Cliffs of Dover upon release (no stuttering, multi-CPU support from the start and so on).

I am patient and give CoD time, but nevertheless I am a little pessimistic.

for you....for others and for me....was different..

janpitor
04-05-2011, 08:46 AM
It will definitely improve. For now I will try lowering resolution and fiddling with affinity mask

Tvrdi
04-05-2011, 08:47 AM
It will definitely improve. For now I will try lowering resolution and fiddling with affinity mask

yep ill try with AM set to 15...

JG52Uther
04-05-2011, 08:50 AM
Dropping resolution from 1680 x 1050 to 1440 x 900 made a big difference for me.
Obviously, Epi filter off (if you don't have epilepsy...)
process affinity 15 in the conf.ini
tree's,houses off or very low
clouds off in missions
seems to work for me anyway!
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v299/JG52Uther/Bounced.jpg

etzi
04-05-2011, 08:56 AM
I have made better experiences for me with AM=14.

Tree_UK
04-05-2011, 09:04 AM
I can get the game to run of sorts if i turn everything down or off, but why would I want to do that, Im not seeing a whole different FM, the AI isnt as good as Il2 from what Ive seen so far. And with everything turned down or off then Il2 looks and feels loads better than Clod.

klem
04-05-2011, 09:21 AM
@Klem

I get even 40FPS in that shot but to what purpose? The game looks like...

If you make the game to look a bit better in some aspects than IL2 1946 it gets utterly unplayable.

Yesterday I was chatting with a squad mate that lives in UK and he said: "I have I7 @ over 3GHz, 12GB of ram, a GT580 combined with a gt460, win 7 64, etc... and besides getting low FPS (around 30) at max settings (1920x1080) I get continuous and annoying stutters and when I get over London is finished... game over... under 10FPS." His satisfaction was in negative numbers...

Well even my rig suffers, over London I was getting fps in the 20s, dropping to 15-20 as I scanned around with TrackIR, that was with Medium Forest and Medium Buildings Amount, 1680x1050, AAx4, AFx8. I then reduced Forest to Very Low and Buildings to Low for two reasons. There are far too many individual trees around (just like FSX) and it just looks wrong especially in London. Very Low seems better. Also Forest and Buildings Amount are known hogs which MG are working on to render in a different way. So with Very Low Forest and Low Buildings Amount I get 30-40fps, dropping into the 20s as I scan around. When I set Building Details from High to Medium I get another 5-10 fps over London (30-45). That should all improve when they patch it.

And thats the point, you may need to play with some settings especially those that don't really matter. MG may have given us a zillion trees but not only doesn't it look right I can do without them.

Does your friend have the 580 combined with 460 in SLi ? (didn't know you could with 2 different cards) because SLi is porked atm, its a fix they are working on. A single GPU works better than 2 atm, also I saw someone raise the question about dual cards (580?) asking if they work as 2 cards in SLi mode but that may be a red herring.

I also have Shadows off and Grass off (who needs it?).

I'm sure things will get better but just like FSX I don't think the PCs are out there yet that can deliver everything the game has to offer.

ASUS Sabertooth mobo
i7 950 @ 4GHz
Megahalems cooler/dual fans
6Gb DDR3 RAM
EVGA GTX570 superclocked
128Gb SSD 300Mb/s
Win 7 Home Premium
850W PSU
22" Samsung 226BW monitor @ 1680x1050
Coolermaster HAF912 plus case

klem
04-05-2011, 09:25 AM
I can get the game to run of sorts if i turn everything down or off, but why would I want to do that, Im not seeing a whole different FM, the AI isnt as good as Il2 from what Ive seen so far. And with everything turned down or off then Il2 looks and feels loads better than Clod.

Did you try disabling SLi?

zapatista
04-05-2011, 09:29 AM
Weird,its running much better than that for me Tvrdi. Have you looked at all the optimisation threads here for tips on how to tweak your computer?

one pattern, going by reports from users, is that the old quad cores with lower hz rates are some of the worst performers in CoD. people with current dual core cpu's (which includes hyper threading, even if by some indications this might not be extensively used yet) seem to do much better

similar with gfx cards, single cards with 1.5 gb vram or higher seem to have no problems, but people with "sli on one card" (with each section having 1 gb vram) dont have much joy.

the older i7 cpu's might seem kool to wannabe's that havnt done their homework before plonking their money down, but these i7's strength really only lies in video encoding/decoding and other similar type applications that are specifically programmed to use them (which most games dont, and afaik there is no indication BoB/SoW will be either). they are a complete misbuy for a gaming in 2010/2011, and usually perform significantly worse then cheaper current midrange i5's (most of which have significantly higher mhz but are only dual cores).

Opitz
04-05-2011, 09:45 AM
Since I gave up any hope of flying at resolutions 3072x and with three monitors without SLI support
I tried easier settings: Window mode 800x600 (my game does not allow for window 1024x768,
if anybody can give me a tip on how to fix this I would be eternaly gratefull (conf.ini change to 1024x768 end with a black screen))
=> SOLVED! I had to change the resolution of my desktop to 3840x1024 and then, in the game,
I was offered the option of windowed 1024x768 :-)

It looks like a very playable game on WinXP and DX9

unlimited fps (422fps)
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/1_422fps.JPG

Graphics are still amazing
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/1_Window800.JPG

Inside the cockpit constant 130fps
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/1_pass.JPG

The sun effects are magnificent, when the sun hits the
front window you are completely blind (here sun is on the side)
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/1_sun.JPG

These are my settings
http://www.stoimenos.com/temp/1_Window800settings.JPG

This is good enough for me, especialy if I manage to get it 1024x768
while waiting for the SLI to be ready.

Excellent game, one step ahead of IL2FB and I am sure we will spend years of discussions with it!
...and 000s of dollars on new graphics cards as we go... :-D

Are you serious ???

janpitor
04-05-2011, 09:52 AM
one early pattern going by the early user reports from users is that the old quad cores at lower hz rates are some of the worst performers in CoD. people with current dual core cpu's (which includes hyper threading, even if by some indications this might not be extensively used yet) seem to do much better

similar with gfx cards, single cards with 1.5 gb vram or higher seem to have no problems, but people with "sli on one card" (with each section having 1 gb vram) dont have much joy.

the older i7 cpu's might seem kool to wannabe's that havnt done their homework before plonking their money down, but these i7's strength really only lies in video encoding/decoding and other similar type applications that are specifically programmed to use them (which most games dont, and afaik there is no indication BoB/SoW will be either). they are a complete misbuy for a gaming in 2010/2011, and usually perform significantly worse then cheaper current midrange i5's (most of which have significantly higher mhz but are only dual cores).

But the true is, I have i5 750 oc 4GHz, 1600/7/7/7 RAM 4GB and GTX480 (stock clocks) and an SSD. And this sim cant run in 1920/1080. I have horrible stutters, although fps is around 30-40 (medium to low settings), on lowest possible settings also no joy. And my GPU never exceeds 95%load. There is a huge problem with coding I think.

janpitor
04-05-2011, 09:53 AM
And I also have SSD in IDE mode...got a little bit better in comparison to AHCI and A-10C is now totally smooth on almost full settings

Triggaaar
04-05-2011, 09:56 AM
Will they EVER optimise this sim? Or this wil be an epic fail?

......is this april fools?I think the April fools are all posting here.
Will they EVER optimise this sim - well Luthier posted to say the next optimisation patch will be out this week, and that there will be more.

Honestly it's like screaming children at christmas because you forgot to buy batteries for their new toy car.

Tvrdi
04-05-2011, 10:09 AM
I think the April fools are all posting here.
Will they EVER optimise this sim - well Luthier posted to say the next optimisation patch will be out this week, and that there will be more.

Honestly it's like screaming children at christmas because you forgot to buy batteries for their new toy car.

its nothing like that mate....I purchased this advertized as a completed product....what Luthier posted - we will see what will be..hope they will fix this


btw, which configi.ini we should modify? One in COD folder inside STEAM main folder or the one located in C:\Users\[username]\Documents\1C SoftClub\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover ?? Also I have HT turned OFF in BIOS as I doubt COD will use 8 cores....should I try with HT set to ON?

Triggaaar
04-05-2011, 10:17 AM
its nothing like that mate....I purchased this as a game, means as a completed productUnfortunately the reality is that didn't happen. Most of us didn't expect it to either. If you really need the game to work perfectly from day one, you've wasted your time. Even if it did work perfectly, there are only planes from 1940, which is only a start - eventually we hope for a lot of aircraft like the original IL2. Suggesting that the game might not ever receive any optimisation, given that the developer has said we will get an optimisation patch in about 1 days time from now, is ridiculous.

btw, which configi.ini we should modify? one in COD folder inside STEAM main folder or the one located in C:\Users\[username]\Documents\1C SoftClub\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover ??The latter

minus10
04-05-2011, 10:28 AM
btw, which configi.ini we should modify? One in COD folder inside STEAM main folder or the one located in C:\Users\[username]\Documents\1C SoftClub\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover ?? Also I have HT turned OFF in BIOS as I doubt COD will use 8 cores....should I try with HT set to ON?

The one under Documents. But also note that if you have Steam Cloud switched on for the app then your changes may well get overwritten. Take a copy as well ;)

To turn off/check Steam Cloud, select the game in your Steam library, r-click, Properties, Updates tab, uncheck Enable Steam Cloud synchronization.

I fiddled with config for Affinity mask, and the user one to move the chat window and it worked fine.

Wolf_Rider
04-05-2011, 10:45 AM
I just checked that and no changes were made... the cloud read the file as I left it on my machine... perhaps there may be confusion about the cloud syn.
for instance if you are on another (of the three allowed) in one location and modded your file there, and then went to another location and a second machine and hooked up the sync would kick in, changing your file.

with no changes being made, all three machineslocations should have the same file

LTP (latest takes precedence)

zapatista
04-05-2011, 10:46 AM
But the true is, I have i5 750 oc 4GHz, 1600/7/7/7 RAM 4GB and GTX480 (stock clocks) and an SSD. And this sim cant run in 1920/1080. I have horrible stutters, although fps is around 30-40 (medium to low settings), on lowest possible settings also no joy. And my GPU never exceeds 95%load. There is a huge problem with coding I think.

aii, that sounds painfull. having looked around forums in the 2 few weeks there seemed to be a pattern emerging, but not the case for your situation.

the SSD seemed to be another solution to the microstutters, combined with 1.5 + gb of vram, but you got both covered

frankly, this is the reason i still havnt bought the game myself (yet i have been one of the most vocal proponents of the project). right now with all the problem reports they need to bring out some fixes SOON for me to jump in and join you lot. i still have no doubt this will be the best ww2 flightsim for years to come, but it might well take them weeks or even a few months to solve the main problems. untill then i simply dont have the time to waste on perpetually searching for fixes which cant be found till they solve the bugs. looking at some of the video's and screenshots of people who can run it well, it looks absolutely stunning when it works well. many of the new features are also pretty special, cant wait to try the fully working collimator gunsight with 6DoF :)

rather funny tho to see tree deliberately put more sand in his man-gina and buy it just so he can whine more. entertaining to watch, but its about time the little creep should get perm banned from this forum for his deliberate malevolent postings (which should be obvious to all now).

Tree_UK
04-05-2011, 11:16 AM
Did you try disabling SLi?

Yes I have klem still no joy.

Tree_UK
04-05-2011, 11:17 AM
aii, that sounds painfull. having looked around forums in the 2 few weeks there seemed to be a pattern emerging, but not the case for your situation.

the SSD seemed to be another solution to the microstutters, combined with 1.5 + gb of vram, but you got both covered

frankly, this is the reason i still havnt bought the game myself (yet i have been one of the most vocal proponents of the project). right now with all the problem reports they need to bring out some fixes SOON for me to jump in and join you lot. i still have no doubt this will be the best ww2 flightsim for years to come, but it might well take them weeks or even a few months to solve the main problems. untill then i simply dont have the time to waste on perpetually searching for fixes which cant be found till they solve the bugs. looking at some of the video's and screenshots of people who can run it well, it looks absolutely stunning when it works well. many of the new features are also pretty special, cant wait to try the fully working collimator gunsight with 6DoF :)

rather funny tho to see tree deliberately put more sand in his man-gina and buy it just so he can whine more. entertaining to watch, but its about time the little creep should get perm banned from this forum for his deliberate malevolent postings (which should be obvious to all now).

Zapatista, you claim to support the game, well go and buy it, your comments here will not be taken seriously until you have installed it and tried it.

Georgio41
04-05-2011, 01:13 PM
Hey Tree, how long have you got until your ban from the SimHQ forums is up? ;)

BernieBrown
04-05-2011, 01:41 PM
well im optimistic that after some time CoD will be optimized and slowly increase our joy down the line...

however the early release probably was forced by ubisoft so they finally get some cash.
if this is the right approach is very questionable and the collateral damage might be bigger than the advantage of early fundings...

anyways the question is how they make it up to the community for the pain they cause?
expectations where high also because they were pushed by certain feature statements...
most of us will sit this out and watch CoD being polished and even contribute to the improvments like in a Beta-Test.

so i do hope ubi and 1c will recognize our patience and reward it with different goodies. i guess this also happend in the past. but since this dillema now with CoD is quite big the goodies for the community need to be accordingly! ;)

bongodriver
04-05-2011, 01:47 PM
despite my many conflicts with various oppinions I do agree the release had a stumble on its first step, but at least it's headed in the right direction (a propper flight sim), I am struggling with this 'pain' analogy people are using.......pain? really?

Bobb4
04-05-2011, 02:23 PM
I will be the first to agree that I do not always like what Tree_UK posts...
But he did see the forest before the trees so to speak.:rolleyes:
He predicted a half finished game and that is exactly what has been delivered.
Calling Tree a creep or any other name does not change the fact that the game should have been delayed and fixed. It is obvious that the game was not tested at all with any modern systems and that is why the release has been an absolute disater.:eek:
I am an old IL2 stalwart and messing in the config files is second nature.
But for a flightsim novice buying this off the shelves in Russia or anywhere else this game is crap.:(
A youngster with an i7, 8 gig of ram and a GTX580 that installs this game is going to toss it especially when you consider you have titles like RoF, Black Shark and other flight sims that actually work out the box.
It may eventually be the il2 killer it was claimed to be but currently it is dying.
One day when Oleg writes his book, I am sure the launch of CoD will make a very amusing read. I know it will not be his last chapter as things will look up soon enough...
Roll on patch 4.11 for CoD of course :)

David Hayward
04-05-2011, 02:36 PM
He predicted a half finished game and that is exactly what has been delivered.


That is like predicting that dogs will bark. It was pretty obvious that the game had to be pushed out the door. That is not the slightest bit unusual in the software business. Get over it.

Bobb4
04-05-2011, 02:51 PM
That is like predicting that dogs will bark. It was pretty obvious that the game had to be pushed out the door. That is not the slightest bit unusual in the software business. Get over it.
Every EA game I have ever purchased has worked out the box. Yes there have been patches to fix some issues early on and then bigger ones for tweaks etc...
But to say it is normal to release a pc game that gives you 8-9 fps on a high end machine, seriously have you been smoking something:rolleyes:

bongodriver
04-05-2011, 02:55 PM
But to say it is normal to release a pc game that gives you 8-9 fps on a high end machine, seriously have you been smoking something

not consistently, only over densely detailed terrain, and even then not 'everyone' has had the same problem, lets get just a little perspective, yes the game wasn't perfect on release, but why do you doomsayers have to paint the blackest possible image.

David Hayward
04-05-2011, 03:16 PM
Every EA game I have ever purchased has worked out the box. Yes there have been patches to fix some issues early on and then bigger ones for tweaks etc...
But to say it is normal to release a pc game that gives you 8-9 fps on a high end machine, seriously have you been smoking something:rolleyes:

EA isn't making WW2 flight sims. RoF was a disaster when it was released. And not everyone is getting 8-9 fps.

Opitz
04-05-2011, 03:50 PM
I will be the first to agree that I do not always like what Tree_UK posts...
But he did see the forest before the trees so to speak.:rolleyes:
He predicted a half finished game and that is exactly what has been delivered.
Calling Tree a creep or any other name does not change the fact that the game should have been delayed and fixed. It is obvious that the game was not tested at all with any modern systems and that is why the release has been an absolute disater.:eek:
I am an old IL2 stalwart and messing in the config files is second nature.
But for a flightsim novice buying this off the shelves in Russia or anywhere else this game is crap.:(
A youngster with an i7, 8 gig of ram and a GTX580 that installs this game is going to toss it especially when you consider you have titles like RoF, Black Shark and other flight sims that actually work out the box.
It may eventually be the il2 killer it was claimed to be but currently it is dying.
One day when Oleg writes his book, I am sure the launch of CoD will make a very amusing read. I know it will not be his last chapter as things will look up soon enough...
Roll on patch 4.11 for CoD of course :)

I know it is not posted in correct forum or thread, but let's share it here, because I think your post is very interesting and even MORE important to realize...

I am creator of Hitler and IL2: CoD rant video, and youtube offers quite nice demography statistic based on the viewers.

What I see on statistics, probably quite a surprise for many - huge majority (more than 70%) of viewers are older than 35 years... 13-17 is absolute minimum... even there are more people 65+ than these youngsters... And btw... 97% of all are men...

It is empiric findings - this community is getting old, it is in fact old. And I think this is the biggest problem of the flight sim game segment, which has to be addressed if you want to have nice and modern sims in future too.

Right now, this game failed to attract young people (or newbies)... There is nothing which would take them away from FPS or RTS games. Next combat flight sim has to be written completely differently, if they would like to attract young men (or newbies).

It is a must, to accept the real empiric data. It is a must to create a sim in balance of technical beauty with "gaming" beauty, which is attractive also to the young people.

Btw... it was viewed by around 10 500 people. I don't think all of them are IL2 only virtual pilots. Many viewed it just because of nostalgia, because they used to fly in IL2 few years ago... it doesn't look like big community, big market segment. In fact it look like this community is shrinking... let's say, dying slowly...

And having this in mind, it must be said by anyone who is really loving PC combat flight sims - to Oleg, Luthier, whoever will pick this fallen flag from mud - Not this way next time. Learn from the mistakes of others and do it differently.. Please...

bongodriver
04-05-2011, 03:52 PM
and some people are doing their best to make sure it does.....

PE_Tigar
04-05-2011, 03:59 PM
Not to sound like a dull old person, but it seems that the youngsters today are living their lives like computer games rather than living the life and gaming separately. In that vein, Angry Birds are par for the course for majority of users, while WoW etc. are there for the hardcore dorky part of the population.

With regards to the platform - less and less and less people are willing to splash out on huge, cumbersome, complicated and unreliable gaming PCs, more and more are satisfied with the console for gaming+tablet or netbook for internet browsing.

So let's face it - we'll have a world where nobody is playing flight sims, except for those playing real-life flight sims (like everyone flying Airbuses, modern military planes or UAVs :))... I'd say in 20 years or so.

Opitz
04-05-2011, 04:06 PM
and some people are doing their best to make sure it does.....


unfortunately, their best is not enough as empiric facts say... But real problem is not their best or lack of skill, the problem is in the philosophy of this sim.

Goal of this sim is to simulate perfectly (if possible) planes, FM, DM, CEM, weather, turbulence etc... . But it is missing crucially simulation of virtual "pilots", squadrons, Battle of Britain theatre as whole... It is critically lacking what's called "social gaming" today... This is even worse and fatal than old MIDI sounds of guns or that Skins are in wrong directory or anything like that...

bongodriver
04-05-2011, 04:09 PM
But it is missing crucially simulation of virtual "pilots", squadrons, Battle of Britain theatre as whole... It is critically lacking what's called "social gaming" today... This is even worse and fatal than old MIDI sounds of guns or that Skins are in wrong directory or anything like that..

after 6 days of european release and still waiting on a north american release I am not exactly surprised it hasn't got it's own community yet.........it just surprises me that others from an apparently 'social' community are so anti-social about this sim and just want to see it die.

Opitz
04-05-2011, 04:11 PM
Not to sound like a dull old person, but it seems that the youngsters today are living their lives like computer games rather than living the life and gaming separately. In that vein, Angry Birds are par for the course for majority of users, while WoW etc. are there for the hardcore dorky part of the population.

With regards to the platform - less and less and less people are willing to splash out on huge, cumbersome, complicated and unreliable gaming PCs, more and more are satisfied with the console for gaming+tablet or netbook for internet browsing.

So let's face it - we'll have a world where nobody is playing flight sims, except for those playing real-life flight sims (like everyone flying Airbuses, modern military planes or UAVs :))... I'd say in 20 years or so.

You don't need to be a mainstream with millions of virtual pilots... Nice result would be to have around 5000 players on Steam as average... now it is 630?

This new game is sitting on Steam between 1 year old games... One above Rome Total War... Come on, you can't be happy about this result just one week after release...

recoilfx
04-05-2011, 04:11 PM
I know it is not posted in correct forum or thread, but let's share it here, because I think your post is very interesting and even MORE important to realize...

I am creator of Hitler and IL2: CoD rant video, and youtube offers quite nice demography statistic based on the viewers.

What I see on statistics, probably quite a surprise for many - huge majority (more than 70%) of viewers are older than 35 years... 13-17 is absolute minimum... even there are more people 65+ than these youngsters... And btw... 97% of all are men...

It is empiric findings - this community is getting old, it is in fact old. And I think this is the biggest problem of the flight sim game segment, which has to be addressed if you want to have nice and modern sims in future too.

Right now, this game failed to attract young people (or newbies)... There is nothing which would take them away from FPS or RTS games. Next combat flight sim has to be written completely differently, if they would like to attract young men (or newbies).

It is a must, to accept the real empiric data. It is a must to create a sim in balance of technical beauty with "gaming" beauty, which is attractive also to the young people.

Btw... it was viewed by around 10 500 people. I don't think all of them are IL2 only virtual pilots. Many viewed it just because of nostalgia, because they used to fly in IL2 few years ago... it doesn't look like big community, big market segment. In fact it look like this community is shrinking... let's say, dying slowly...

And having this in mind, it must be said by anyone who is really loving PC combat flight sims - to Oleg, Luthier, whoever will pick this fallen flag from mud - Not this way next time. Learn from the mistakes of others and do it differently.. Please...

Not to mention that people constantly berate Wings of Prey for trying to bridge the gap between arcade and realism. It's one of the best realized product we have in ages, that really tries to bridge the gap, yet people just stomp on it.

Old geezers.

bongodriver
04-05-2011, 04:15 PM
Not to mention that people constantly berate Wings of Prey for trying to bridge the gap between arcade and realism. It's one of the best realized product we have in ages, that really tries to bridge the gap, yet people just stomp on it.

Old geezers.

personally I wouldn't condone criticising WOP, it does what it does very well and it does look very nice, it just doesn't satisfy the more sim based sensitivity, what I notice is quite the opposite, people are trying to flog ClOD to death by comparing it to IL2(modded) or WOP......quite unfair.

etzi
04-05-2011, 04:22 PM
There is another statement from gamestar.de one of the biggest german computer games magazines.

http://www.gamestar.de/spiele/il-2-sturmovik-cliffs-of-dover/news/il_2_sturmovik_cliffs_of_dover,46106,2322049.html

"They refuse to test the game, because they have 3 well-equipped computers in editorial office and the game is actuall not properly playable."

David Hayward
04-05-2011, 04:24 PM
There is another statement from gamestar.de one of the biggest german computer games magazines.

http://www.gamestar.de/spiele/il-2-sturmovik-cliffs-of-dover/news/il_2_sturmovik_cliffs_of_dover,46106,2322049.html

"They refuse to test the game, because they have 3 well-equipped computers in editorial office and the game is actuall not properly playable."

What's your point?

bongodriver
04-05-2011, 04:25 PM
There is another statement from gamestar.de one of the biggest german computer games magazines.

http://www.gamestar.de/spiele/il-2-s...6,2322049.html

"They refuse to test the game, because they have 3 well-equipped computers in editorial office and the game is actuall not properly playable."

I can see you rubbing your hands together and laughing..........do you feel good now? maybe youd like to pull the wings off some flies or strangle a puppy too?

Opitz
04-05-2011, 04:25 PM
personally I wouldn't condone criticising WOP, it does what it does very well and it does look very nice, it just doesn't satisfy the more sim based sensitivity, what I notice is quite the opposite, people are trying to flog ClOD to death by comparing it to IL2(modded) or WOP......quite unfair.

Maybe it is unfair, but it is even more than unfair what Maddox Games has created and sold to their loyal and loving customers...

bongodriver
04-05-2011, 04:26 PM
Maybe it is unfair, but it is even more than unfair what Maddox Games is created and sold to their loyal and loving customers...

Don't make me laugh.....if any of you were loyal you'd be slightly sympathetic, all I see are back stabbing creeps.

etzi
04-05-2011, 04:27 PM
What's your point?

I did not want to open a new thread. I want to prove with sources that the game is not playable yet. What some of you still deny.

I cannot hardly remember a game, which could not be tested after the release.

I try to remain objective, you not.

I want to hit anyone at all to the pan. This is an assumption! I would love so, if it works properly.

But the best yesterday and not just in one year!

David Hayward
04-05-2011, 04:27 PM
Maybe it is unfair, but it is even more than unfair what Maddox Games is created and sold to their loyal and loving customers...

I'm pretty sure their loyal customers understand what is going on.

David Hayward
04-05-2011, 04:28 PM
I did not want to open a new thread. and top with the statement that CoD is not yet playable. I want to prove with sources that the game is not playable yet. What some still deny.

Again, what's the point? Some people can play it now, some can't.

bongodriver
04-05-2011, 04:30 PM
I want to prove with sources that the game is not playable yet. What some still deny


yeah....the ones who are actually playing it and are satisfied that it is....do you not get it, you won't prove anything.

etzi
04-05-2011, 04:36 PM
yeah....the ones who are actually playing it and are satisfied that it is....do you not get it, you won't prove anything.

And again, bongodriver allow only his own opinion! :rolleyes:

David Hayward
04-05-2011, 04:38 PM
And again, bongodriver allow only his own opinion! :rolleyes:

You can have your own opinion, but you don't get to make up your own facts. Fact is that some people are able to play the game.

bongodriver
04-05-2011, 04:46 PM
And again, bongodriver allow only his own opinion!

You fail!!!! I am one of the ones who CAN'T play it.....but I am inteligent enough to see there are people who can.......get it now?

Opitz
04-05-2011, 04:50 PM
I'm pretty sure their loyal customers understand what is going on.

Yes... "loyal" customers wait and hope for patches and updates... but this is the reason why the average number of players on Steam is 600... If there is no such horrible bugs and problems, it could be ten times more... why not?

And if even one of the biggest German game site refuse to review and also recommend to its readers to wait with buying, something is definitely wrong. It is not just a small flaws... it is a major release failure... there should not be any excuses on or within Maddox Games, chopped heads should be flying and rolling on the deck already... well... in normal company and industry...

bongodriver
04-05-2011, 04:53 PM
Yes... "loyal" customers wait and hope for patches and updates... but this is the reason why the average number of players on Steam is 600... If there is no such horrible bugs and problems, it could be ten times more... why not?

And if even one of the biggest German game site refuse to review and also recommend to its readers to wait with buying, something is definitely wrong. It is not just a small flaws... it is a major release failure... there should not be any excuse withing Maddox Games, chopped heads should be rolling on the deck already...

so you like to strangle puppy's too Opitz and Etzi sounds like quite a double act.

David Hayward
04-05-2011, 04:59 PM
Yes... "loyal" customers wait and hope for patches and updates... but this is the reason why the average number of players on Steam is 600... If there is no such horrible bugs and problems, it could be ten times more... why not?

And if even one of the biggest German game site refuse to review and also recommend to its readers to wait with buying, something is definitely wrong. It is not just a small flaws... it is a major release failure... there should not be any excuses on or within Maddox Games, chopped heads should be flying and rolling on the deck already... well... in normal company and industry...

Why would you possibly care if heads are chopped over this?

Opitz
04-05-2011, 05:00 PM
so you like to strangle puppy's too Opitz and Etzi sounds like quite a double act.

I don't understand, sorry... English is not my native language... Are you trying to offend me personally because I am saying what you don't like to hear?

BernieBrown
04-05-2011, 05:01 PM
if you want to keep the genre alive and attract new customers it needs more than a hardcore flightsim that focuses on the bare functionality of the models.

lacking immersiveness on music, sounds, gameplay in missions and campaign will scare off newbies. i bought the sim. cuz i love the realistic damagemodel and i was hoping for a good campaign. i will stick to CoD and watch it be optimized in performance and usability.

but i doubt that it will create the sales needed if there is no significant improvement on immersiveness after the performance has been fixed...

Opitz
04-05-2011, 05:04 PM
Why would you possibly care if heads are chopped over this?

I tell you this - I will wait for the second patch... After it is released and if it will improve mayor flaws, OK there is some hope on long long way... but if the patch will be same effective as first one... it will be the end... this second patch is critical. if it fails, game over...

bongodriver
04-05-2011, 05:12 PM
I don't understand, sorry... English is not my native language... Are you trying to offend me personally because I am saying what you don't like to hear?

are you saying you are not trying to be offensive? you basically admitted you are trying to 'prove' this game is a failure....that could be considered insulting, here is a analogy for you....do you like any sports? do you support a sports team? many do......and some people will support that team wether it is good or bad and be loyal to the end and they won't be very happy if someone 'shit talks' about them, you are more than entitled to your oppinion but are you really surprised that you will get an argument?

David Hayward
04-05-2011, 05:12 PM
I tell you this - I will wait for the second patch... After it is released and if it will improve mayor flaws, OK there is some hope on long long way... but if the patch will be same effective as first one... it will be the end... this second patch is critical. if it fails, game over...

Why do think I would care what you're going to do? Heck, why do you think anyone cares what you are going to do?

They are going to patch the game. Then they are going to patch the game some more. Eventually they will fix it. If that's isn't good enough for you, then your opinion does not really matter.

bongodriver
04-05-2011, 05:13 PM
I tell you this - I will wait for the second patch... After it is released and if it will improve mayor flaws, OK there is some hope on long long way... but if the patch will be same effective as first one... it will be the end... this second patch is critical. if it fails, game over...

really? because you say so? fair enough......

Tree_UK
04-05-2011, 05:31 PM
so you like to strangle puppy's too Opitz and Etzi sounds like quite a double act.

lol, this is laughable, lets get back on track, this is a performance related thread, my game is unplayable hence the title I started, there are a few that are enjoying the game but the mass majority have problems.

Theres no point discussing this with bongodriver or david, they are proof that you cannot reason with the unreasonable.

nearmiss
04-05-2011, 05:35 PM
This thread is going nowhere, not that it ever was going anywhere. :confused:

It is closed...