Did a player review of CoD over at Gamespot...

[mazex]

Look here:

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/il-2-sturmovik-cliffs-of-dover/player_review.html?id=760873

Do you agree? Go there and give the game a boost in that case by voting for the real game that most of us can see looking through the bad fps and stuttering that for sure will get fixed (along with stuff like force feedback support etc).

[BigPickle]

Can it be fixed though? I hope big time it can be.

[baronWastelan]

9.5? Reminds me of the Nobel Prize being awarded to a US president, based on the expectation that he won't go around bombing small countries that pose no significant threat...

[Rattlehead]

It will probably be worthy of such a score once most of, if not all the bugs have been ironed out.

At the moment I can't say it's really deserving of such a lofty score. In time though...

[nearmiss]

Mazex

It's a good review, and I agree with you.

Anyone that has been with IL2 knows Oleg will stand up against the heat and perform as usual. It won't be instantly of course, but the issues will resolve.

I remember the Ubi boards were full of half empty glasses after every addon or patch release of IL2, and IL2 was always the number ONE WW2 air combat simulator. LOL

Don't be disheartened about the negative jabs, every BOB COD forums and blog is getting blasted.

A few things I should mention. There are many so-called users that are nothing less than pirates, and their free toys are being steadily taken from them with Steam,etc. These pirates frequent the forums and we don't know who they are for the most part. They are clever with their verbs and nouns... not to expose themselves. I think most of the blastings on BOB COD forums are from them.

There are some legitimate complaints, but we all know the issues will be fixed soon enough. It is just great to finally have a completed BOB COD, even if there are some things left to be done.

[mazex]

It will probably be worthy of such a score once most of, if not all the bugs have been ironed out.

At the moment I can't say it's really deserving of such a lofty score. In time though...

OK, I agree and I lowered my "expected" score to 9.0. The orignal IL2 got 9.2 in the official review if I don't remember it wrong - so why not this title when it gets fixed?

[MACADEMIC]

Look here:

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/il-2-sturmovik-cliffs-of-dover/player_review.html?id=760873

Do you agree? Go there and give the game a boost in that case by voting for the real game that most of us can see looking through the bad fps and stuttering that for sure will get fixed (along with stuff like force feedback support etc).

Nice review Mazex! I can't really comment myself because I don't have any personal experience with CoD (so far have played mostly Birds of Prey on PS3) but have been following here very closely. I hope you're right and the game will become deserving of your high anticipation!

MAC

[Blakduk]

I would endorse your review- there are definitely a few bugs to iron out but the flight model alone is a generation ahead of Il2.
I challenge anyone to play CoD of and jump back into Il2 and NOT agree what a huge leap forward it is in every way. Il2 honestly looks like an arcade game by comparison.
I expected Oleg to astonish me again, and he has.

[maxwellbest]

We are the guys who paid IL2 CoD at full price for a sim that could continue the IL2 saga. But in reality we are the guys who paid 50€ for being part of a full price/huge scale beta test. EVERYTHING needs to be fixed, I mean it, EVERYTHING.

I am long term IL2 "fan boi" and I have to say, despite being wary of using charged language on these forums, thats about the size of it. If the developers/publishers had said, as DCS did with their A10c, heres an early release beta, would you please aid us in the development of your favorite title and we will reward you with a top notch flight simulator, then NONE of this would have happened. Fancy someone new to the genre picking this up and attempting to play/learn this. (BTW, if anyone is reading this who is new, then I reccomened getting hold of a copy of Wings of Prey)

That said, there does some to be an extremely vocal lot on the forums, not pointing fingers. As to what motivates them, I have no idea.

[ICDP]

Look here:

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/il-2-sturmovik-cliffs-of-dover/player_review.html?id=760873

Do you agree? Go there and give the game a boost in that case by voting for the real game that most of us can see looking through the bad fps and stuttering that for sure will get fixed (along with stuff like force feedback support etc).

So let me get this straight, you wrote a review and gave CoD 9.0 based on what it "could be in the future, IF the developer decides to fix it"? Being a bit pressumptious and to be frank a bit of a blinkered fanboy there.

Who in their right mind gives a score based on potential fixes that might not even see the light of day. CoD does have potential but potential is not a tangible measurable thing, it is definatetly not something you can use to artificially bump up the score for what is essentailly a bug ridden mess right now.

At most CoD should be getting around 50% for effort and no more, certainly not 90 based on what might be and what you want it to be.

[mazex]

So let me get this straight, you wrote a review and gave CoD 9.0 based on what it "could be in the future, IF the developer decides to fix it"? Being a bit pressumptious and to be frank a bit of a blinkered fanboy there.


Well, the intention is to tell the story of how we have gotten the other titles in this series for spoiled 18-year old brats that usually only buy block buster titles from studios with budgets that compete the major Hollywood movie productions... Maddox Games is not a development studio with 200+ persons working on a title like Call of Duty. I guess that their QA department that is larger than the whole MG team. It is tough, but we are that QA team in many cases, like with other small developers. As it is now this game has been pushed out to early, but like I write - just flying that Moth over the channel proves to me that this game is a 9.0 when they just fix the major bugs...

But that is naturally only my opinion, which you have the right to challenge :)

[Hunden]

Buddy you deserve the "N°1 blind and stupid fanboy crown" for this. I didn't pay 50€ to be considered as a pirate by someone who prefer to see what we would like to see instead of what he has right before him.

"We don't know who they are for the most part". We are the guys who paid IL2 CoD at full price for a sim that could continue the IL2 saga. But in reality we are the guys who paid 50€ for being part of a full price/huge scale beta test. EVERYTHING needs to be fixed, I mean it, EVERYTHING.

You "Nearmissed" an occasion to shut it! You'd better think a bit more before accusing me and every angry user of being pirates.

You Sir who have little faith should be playing with something else, I dont care if you paid for the game. You have no idea what you have in your hands therfore you dont deserve to have it , so send it to me . It will get fixed. I've only been playing il2 for 2 years and i have total faith in the devs and the community to get this right. One thing I've learned since il2 is figure it out or go play BF2.:grin:

[Chivas]

I agree that the early release was a huge mistake. I understand the disappointment of not being able to enjoy the game due to stutters and frame issues. BUT I'm shocked at the total loss of foresight and the willingness to throw the Cliffs of Dover under the bus. Especially when we know that there is fix for the stutters and frame rate issues not far away in a patch. Yes there will be more problems to fix once we can actually start playing the game deeper into the missions, but again we know the history of the developer to repair, support, and add to the series for years. Venting in the forums and game sites without also adding that the problems will probably be fixed accomplishes nothing other than making our genre weaker, by scaring away potential customers.

[chappy]

Well, the intention is to tell the story of how we have gotten the other titles in this series for spoiled 18-year old brats that usually only buy block buster titles from studios with budgets that compete the major Hollywood movie productions... Maddox Games is not a development studio with 200+ persons working on a title like Call of Duty. I guess that their QA department that is larger than the whole MG team. It is tough, but we are that QA team in many cases, like with other small developers. As it is now this game has been pushed out to early, but like I write - just flying that Moth over the channel proves to me that this game is a 9.0 when they just fix the major bugs...

But that is naturally only my opinion, which you have the right to challenge :)


if we are the QA team, then they should definitely have done what DCS did and open beta it for more widespread testing. that is in effect what is happening this very minute except we bought it with the expectation of a realease ready sim.
what would u score it right now if it was to not receive any fixes or improvements? i personally would score it about a 6.5

[maxwellbest]

but like I write - just flying that Moth over the channel proves to me that this game is a 9.0 when they just fix the major bugs...


After posting earlier on the state of this sim, I went and fired up a single player mission, set friendlies to 4, enemies to 4, video to med. I, like you, just got a taste of what is under the hood with this sim. The sea looked sensational, the cockpit canopy frosted over as I flew through the light/dark puffy clouds (Brrrrrrr, its cold out there), couldnt hit jack with my Hurri (hmmmmmm, those internal sounds...need some work there) but thats my forgetting a lot of what I had learned in IL2. Yes. Its all true, there is a wealth of potential in there. Fingers crossed.

[Hunden]

Sorry but my 50€ say that I deserve it. On the contrary what I've bought didn't deserve to worth that much ;) Do you like to buy unfinished things? Then buy a car with 2 wheels missing, half of the seats present, a leaking fuel tank, an unreliable engine, a malfunctioning gearbox, no wind shield, holes all over the hull...and don't forget to make a big hug to the seller and the constructor for such a marvellous piece of engineering :-P

Then you can start this 1000 km trip you've dreamed about for so many years.

Yes, seen like that it's a real act of faith ;)

BF2 isn't really my kind of games. I even don't have it. Maybe flying on FC2, ROF, BMS (beta test), DCS A-10C. Don't know. IL2 COD? Well, once it will be patched enough, IF it will be patched enough. To me it deserves a 3, no more at the moment.

Actually I do its called a muscle car rebuild you should try it sometime there is nothing like hearing and feeling the sound of a big block V8.:grin:

[Stanger]

9.5? Reminds me of the Nobel Prize being awarded to a US president, based on the expectation that he won't go around bombing small countries that pose no significant threat...


+1 on that comparison.

[Hunden]

Hunden - "Hey just LISTEN to my brand..."

<Engine shut down by itself>

Hunden - "Oh crap..."

<Hunden restarting engine>

Hunden - "Like I said, just..."

<Engine shut down by itself>

Hunden - "Not a problem!" :D

<Hunden restarting engine>

Hunden - "Like I..."

<Engine shut down by itself>

Hunden - "Well, just LOOK at my brand new car! Isn't she beautiful?" :cool:

Kerdou - "Yeah, good LOOKING car at full stop. Like CoD screenshots in some ways. Do you want me to send you to the nearest garage with my everydaylifereliable car"? :mrgreen:

LOL I have both and still there is nothing like my 69 chevy. If you've never driven a muscle car there is no point in going any further with someone whoes only driven a Honda.

[mazex]

9.5? Reminds me of the Nobel Prize being awarded to a US president, based on the expectation that he won't go around bombing small countries that pose no significant threat...

Hey - I am from Sweden, so what do you know - maybe I'm in the Nobel Prize committee? ;) I actually think it was rather clever, even though it was too obvious that it was done for the purpose you describe above :) But after thinking a while, I did lower my score on Gamespot to 9.0 as I don't think they will ever reach 9.5 which I had hoped for.

In this case people write reviews over at Gamespot giving the game between 1.5 and 2.5, claiming to have waited for the title for years - and when you read it you realize that one of them has even not bought the game yet! He gives it 1.5 on rumors! What good on earth is that for the future willingness to fund patching of this game by 1C? When the "normal" users goes to Gamespot and reads this on the US release - will they buy it? No way, and they will not wait a few months which I respect that some people do when reading of the bugs - they are lost.

As it is now Cliffs of Dover has a PC rank of 17 on Gamespot, so there are a lot of people reading this. But I am sure that Ilya is not. So if the ones givning it the axe over there really want them to fix the bugs - is this the best way to achieve that? They just kill the product, but I guess it's their way of saying thank you to the team that has struggled for six years with this and got pushed out on the dance floor by 1C/Ubisoft before getting their pants on. Yeah, we are real flight sim fans - so let them die for having that stuttering on the release day. They maybe fix it next week but that does not matter for us long time fans. They must die.

The thing is that IF the manage to completely fix the stuttering and gain 20-50% fps (which may happen as early as next week) - it WILL be a completely other game, even if there are many other things on the list to fix. In that case, will those persons that have given it 1.5 on a rumor go there and update their score? No way, it will stay there for all time to come. So if no one posts about the good stuff which is obvious to many of us that have an attention span of more than a few hour, who of the Gamespot readers will ever know that? Today it maybe has the highest hit ratio at Gamespot it will ever have? And sites like Gamespot and IGN are the major "recruitment" channels for new pilots to fill out the ranks of pilots lost over the channel ;)

[nearmiss]

Put it where it hurts...

Two months ago know one knew Jack about when we could get the BOB COD.

I've read thousands of postings for the past six years, from the earlier days when UbiSoft and SimHQ were the principal voices on IL2 and it's successor.

During the past two years we have had a constant barrage of members on this forums hanging on every word from Oleg or Luthier. Any word about the BOB SOW from either of them brought a rush of discussion.

Everyone wanted the release, and many members haven't made an issue about a so-called "incomplete" BOB COD. These people are glad it is released, because they know the "REAL BETA" testing is in process.

The real testing begins when things get fixed that affect all kinds of system configurations. Already we are reading where performance variations don't make sense... yet the BOB COD is working well with some strange setups.

Strange things are happening. LOL

I love it, we have the BOB COD released. The BOB CD boxes are flowing out and the developer is in a frenzy to make as many people happy as possible... post haste.

-----------------------------------
Some fixes may take awhile, but I venture to say within 60 days we will have an awesome CFS.

[MD_Wild_Weasel]

i agree with you on that nearmis, but ive heard that oleg has left 1c?. So if our beloved Oleg has left hasnt his brainchild?

[nearmiss]

Oleg hasn't gone anywhere.

The IL2 BOB COD will be the benchmark ww2 air combat simulator.

Just wait...
don't speculate....
it will be your wisdom...

There is nothing to compare that is even close, and until that day comes I doubt Oleg will even take an extended vacation.

MSFT has the money and resources to build a competitive product, but they don't have the leadership to really listen to people and build what people want. That was proven "in spades" with the CFS3.

Oleg reviews the boards and will have discussions with anyone to achieve his desire to build what people want. He has proven that thousands of times in dozens of forums on the internet.

[[RS]Boomer]

Great review Mazex, I couldn't have said it better. I just bought Cliffs of Dover yesterday morning and spent the whole day playing with it. I finally got it to run very smooth, averaging about 50 fps. I don't know why all these people have to bash the game and give it 2.0 score. Yes it has some problems but I know they will fix them. I couldn't have been happier about my purchase, Thank you 1C for this great game! And thank you to the person who posted about Justflight info(thats the only place you can get this game in the US), so I don't have to wait two more weeks :cool:

[MD_Wild_Weasel]

i hope your right nearmiss.. i see great potential in COd, but not without Oleg or ilya

[Fritz X]

So let me get this straight, you wrote a review and gave CoD 9.0 based on what it "could be in the future, IF the developer decides to fix it"? Being a bit pressumptious and to be frank a bit of a blinkered fanboy there.

Who in their right mind gives a score based on potential fixes that might not even see the light of day.

Believe me, this even happens with "professional" reviewers then and now. Over here in Germany we have a game magazine called "Gamestar" (no advertisement intended, you just about to see why...), which I used to buy and read for many years. Then the test of "Gothic 3" came, and they rated it 90%, even if it was full of bugs, game breaking glitches and obvious design flaws, that rendered the game almost unplayable at first. Their argument: Yeah, it's full of bugs, but we're sure they'll be fixed via patch.

I never bought another issue of that magazine afterwards again.

CoD does have potential but potential is not a tangible measurable thing, it is definatetly not something you can use to artificially bump up the score for what is essentailly a bug ridden mess right now.

At most CoD should be getting around 50% for effort and no more, certainly not 90 based on what might be and what you want it to be.

Absolutely agree on anything you said. There is lot of potential, but due to its' crucial status it's simply not worth any rating over 50%, yet. More, it's simply unfair to rate higher for things that "might happen". I can understand that people want to support Oleg and his crew, but what about first time customers who buy a game only because of such ratings? Yes, their money will end up at Oleg/1C/Ubi, but once they find out that things are not working properly, they'll most likely feel cheated (remember: New costumers might not know about the original IL-2 got treated with updates). In the end, they'll not only dislike the game, but also the community who advertised the product in an "un-honest" way.

Of course I'm more than willing to change a personal rating after the major flaws are ironed out, but that'll take some time. I just hope the game will get the chance to show it's full potential eventually.

[MD_Wild_Weasel]

i guess well have to wait till tomorrow and see if luthier can deliver the first patch with an official reponse. Fingers crossed gents.

[Mauloch]

Mazex, thumbs up on the review!

I have never been on a forum with opinions ranging from one extreme to the next like this one. People shooting fast from the hip with a "take no prisoner" attitude. Just fantastic reading these last few weeks guys, and hell, I don't even have my copy yet. One things for certain though, I will be getting my hands on one!

Cliffs of Dover has to be a masterpiece... nothing short of pure evil or greatness can come from such a release.

Never has so much been crowed by so many, to so few!

[nearmiss]

I said it before and I'll say it again.

The people that are into software piracy are mad as hell.

They have been driving us nuts talking down on the forums, since the release of BOB COD on steam.

The future will require piracy protection... and the future is now.

All the bit about "I won't buy it, etc" --- LOL ---- They weren't planning to buy it anyway.

Hang on the ride maybe a bit bumpy. The end will be an awesome BOB COD.

Just check on the stats on some of the pirate sites how many illegal downlaods of IL2 there have been.
I remember reviewing such a site several years back, on that one site they had downloaded over 1/2 million copies of IL2 sturmovik 1946.

That is an astronomical theft...

So yeah! something has to be done, done, and done again to protect intellectual property.

[Chivas]

The low reviews are a total travesty and have accomplished nothing but drive people away from our already weak genre. I'm a huge fan and have alot of respect for what Maddox games has delivered over the last 10 years for our community. I have no respect for those people who have shown absolutely no foresight, with their rating. They will be proven wrong in spades, but much damage has already been done to our community and genre. Luckily a few of the professional reviewers have shown some intelligence and have delayed their reviews until the game is patched.

[GnigruH]

9.0 superb
When they fix the premature birth problems that make it almost unplayable, this will be THE ultimate WWII simulator.

LOL, I wouldn't call this thing you wrote 'a review'.

[ICDP]

The low reviews are a total travesty and have accomplished nothing but drive people away from our already weak genre. I'm a huge fan and have alot of respect for what Maddox games has delivered over the last 10 years for our community. I have no respect for those people who have shown absolutely no foresight, with their rating. They will be proven wrong in spades, but much damage has already been done to our community and genre. Luckily a few of the professional reviewers have shown some intelligence and have delayed their reviews until the game is patched.

So to save the flightsim genre we should accept bug ridden feature lacking software that was 7 years in the making?

Lets review what was supposed to make in the final release according to Oleg's own information over the years.

Dynamic Campaign: Didn't make it and might never make it.
Dynamic Weather: Didn't make it, a WiP that may or may not make it someday.
Hundreds of planes in the air at once: Didn't make it.
AI that won't see through clouds: Didin't make it, AI can see through thick clouds as well as they can in clear weather.
SU26: Didn't make it, was removed at the last minute and people didn't find out until after purchase.
New sound system: Didn't make it, instead we have what is probably the very worst collection of sounds to ever grace a game.

Add to this the fact that Force Feedback stick are not supported. Only every sim released in the last 10m years has this feature. No mater though they didn't promise this feature and can't even be arsed to inform us if they ever will.

Now lets look at what made it in to the game.

Highly detailed tanks and vehicles that we can't even see while flying around. I remember seeing the screenshots in the weekly updates and thinking why do they think modelling every rivets and gear knob on these vehicles and guns is important in a flightsim.

Spitgirl (wow this one is a real head scrathcer, they don't have time to add FFB but they do have time to add a girl to your Spitfire cockpit).

Pleceholder sounds... oops sorry I remember repeatedly being told the sound we were hearing were only "placeholders". It reminds me of the time Oleg said IL2 sounds were great, you just don't have good speakers.

It sounds like I hate CoD but this is not the case, I am actually enjoying it and can see that Cliffs of Dover might be a great sim in 3 years. Right now it is mediocre at best, it should be reviewed and scored based on what we have now, not on what it might be or on what we hoped it would be.

[[RS]Boomer]

ICDP, I don't agree with you statement. I feel that this game is absolutely stunning. There is nothing that can compare the feeling when you are diving in on a formation of 88's and you get a good bead on the lead, kicking the rudder left and right and watching every bullet that hits make a hole in the exact spot that it hit... Too me, this is all that I could ever ask for in a combat sim. The flashes from the bullet impacts are pretty awesome. All in all, it really feels like we have our WW2 sim that we have always wanted.
As for the lag and stutters, I really haven't had them. I average around 50-70 FPS with a decent size battle going on. I know this will all be smoothed out over the coming months to make even more amazing. I say great job 1C and keep them coming! ~S~

[Chivas]

So to save the flightsim genre we should accept bug ridden feature lacking software that was 7 years in the making?

Lets review what was supposed to make in the final release according to Oleg's own information over the years.

Dynamic Campaign: Didn't make it and might never make it.
Dynamic Weather: Didn't make it, a WiP that may or may not make it someday.
Hundreds of planes in the air at once: Didn't make it.
AI that won't see through clouds: Didin't make it, AI can see through thick clouds as well as they can in clear weather.
SU26: Didn't make it, was removed at the last minute and people didn't find out until after purchase.
New sound system: Didn't make it, instead we have what is probably the very worst collection of sounds to ever grace a game.

Add to this the fact that Force Feedback stick are not supported. Only every sim released in the last 10m years has this feature. No mater though they didn't promise this feature and can't even be arsed to inform us if they ever will.

Now lets look at what made it in to the game.

Highly detailed tanks and vehicles that we can't even see while flying around. I remember seeing the screenshots in the weekly updates and thinking why do they think modelling every rivets and gear knob on these vehicles and guns is important in a flightsim.

Spitgirl (wow this one is a real head scrathcer, they don't have time to add FFB but they do have time to add a girl to your Spitfire cockpit).

Pleceholder sounds... oops sorry I remember repeatedly being told the sound we were hearing were only "placeholders". It reminds me of the time Oleg said IL2 sounds were great, you just don't have good speakers.

Cliffs of Dover might be a great sim in 3 years, right now it is mediocre at best. I do see the potential but It should be reviewd and scored based on what we have now, not on what it might be or on what we hoped it would be.


First off there were never any promises. Second most of those features will become part of the IL-2 series. If the reviewer posted all these faults and added that the developer has a history of fixing bugs, adding features, and supporting his products for years, there would be no problem. All these reviews have accomplished is drive away new people that may have bought the product if they new it would improve. The reviews are petty from people who should now better.

[mazex]

LOL, I wouldn't call this thing you wrote 'a review'.

Well, since the Spectrum days I think I have played almost all the major flight sim titles on the market, with a few exceptions I have played the minor and the ones that should remain forgotten too. Thereby my crystal ball is rather hefty and I see good things in it regarding this title - IF it is not left in the gutter after a number of teenagers cut it down by screaming in all the forums and other channels they find.

Wandering off topic... I use to play Little Big Planet 2 with my kids on the PS3 (great game by the way - as far from serious flight sims as you can get). The hero called Sackboy has an arch enemy in the game that naturally gets dealt with in the final battle called "The Negativitron". He feeds on the negative thoughts people have and in the last cut scene he says "You can never truly defeat me, I am in all of you... You created me, if you destroy me - you destroy yourselves". A straight reference to Joseph Conrad - just like Apocalypse Now...

Anyway - I feel that Negativitron should have left Sackboy alone and popped over to this forum instead, living a nice life - fat and happy ;)

[Lixma]

Well, since the Spectrum days I think I have played almost all the major flight sim titles on the market, with a few exceptions I have played the minor and the ones that should remain forgotten too.
Me too. (Tomahawk FTW....LensLok FTL)

Thereby my crystal ball is rather hefty and I see good things in it regarding this title
Me too.

But don't call it a 'review'. Call it clairvoyance.

In Conrad's 'Lord Jim' the titular hero eloped to a life on the sea with romantic notions of adventure and bravery. He imagined himself as a '9.0' but when it came down to it he found himself a '3.5'. He then spent the rest of his life dealing with this ordinary fact.

Should an honest review of Jim's character be based on what we'd like him to be, what he could be, or what he is?

[ParaB]

Me too. (Tomahawk FTW....LensLok FTL)

I wonder how many users here get that reference.

^^

Hated that thing, half the time couldn't make out the codes at all...

[SacaSoh]

I don't regret buying this unfinished game, but for sure this "review" is the epitome of fanboyism.

[nearmiss]

I don't regret buying this unfinished game, but for sure this "review" is the epitome of fanboyism.

You have made less than 20 postings, and you call names.

There are many of us who have been with Il2 since 2001. We know Oleg, Luthier and what they will do for this community.

The game isn't unfinished, maybe it doesn't work well with your system. You need to spend time on this forums reading and you will find there are plenty of people who are already enjoying the BOB COD. You might read something that will apply to your situation.

Patches are coming as well. This is not some gamer gamey kind of application, if you are looking for an easy learn and burn you should stick with console gaming. BOB COD is a sophisticated, complex application that will take many hours to learn. If you are NOT interested to really apply yourself to learn... you are probably wasting your time.

[SacaSoh]

You have made less than 20 postings, and you call names.

There are many of us who have been with Il2 since 2001. We know Oleg, Luthier and what they will do for this community.

The game isn't unfinished, maybe it doesn't work well with your system. You need to spend time on this forums reading and you will find there are plenty of people who are already enjoying the BOB COD. You might read something that will apply to your situation.

Patches are coming as well. This is not some gamer gamey kind of application, if you are looking for an easy learn and burn you should stick with console gaming. BOB COD is a sophisticated, complex application that will take many hours to learn. If you are NOT interested to really apply yourself to learn... you are probably wasting your time.

Yeah... every thread i see the "if you are looking for an easy learn and burn you should stick with console gaming. BOB COD is a sophisticated, complex application that will take many hours to learn."...

Maybe helps if i tell you that i play IL-2, ROF, OFF, FreeFalcon, DCS Black Shark and A-10... My rig is powerful enought to run all these games on max, 1920x1080 4xAA, and don't tell me of "under the hood calculations". If you think this game isn't unfinished, sorry, you are a unconscious fanboy.

The game will get better sure, like i said, i don't regret buying this unfinished game (i read the forums before buying it), but i will not judge it based on a possible future, i had to RMA my crystal ball...

[nearmiss]

Chivas

I have given away many copies of Il2 and Il2 1946. I have found our genre game "PC air combat simulation" just isn't for everyone.

I recently made a real effort to find a IL2 1946 at the urging of my friend.
My friend anxiously installed it and stayed with it all of two days. He immediately wanted more aircraft, etc. I referred him to the TD upgrades, but it was too much trouble for him to mess with "all that".

IMO, it is probably best to tell people where to find it and leave them alone. If they are interested to take the time to learn and enjoy it good for them.

It just isn't a gamer type game.

I remember when I was into scuba diving. I introduced my friends to it by simple snorkeling first. Not one of the lot ever went any further. Learning dive tables or using dive computers, and the basic techie things just wasn't something they wanted to do. Yet, there are still millions of people that love to scuba.

Oleg will sell alot of copies to people who never do a darn thing with it, but admire the "stuff" for a few days. Don't care how much you talk it up, if they aren't into it... it won't make any difference.

Oleg has made his bid to our genre of player, and done the best job he can do. Those of us who are into it... will love it, and appreciate all his efforts for a very long time.

[nearmiss]

Yeah... every thread i see the "if you are looking for an easy learn and burn you should stick with console gaming. BOB COD is a sophisticated, complex application that will take many hours to learn."...

Maybe helps if i tell you that i play IL-2, ROF, OFF, DCS Black Shark and A-10... My rig is powerful enought to run all these games on max, 1920x1080 4xAA, and don't tell me of "under the hood calculations". If you think this game isn't unfinished, sorry, you are a unconscious fanboy.

The game will get better sure, like i said, i don't regret buying this unfinished game (i read the forums before buying it), but i will not judge it based on a possible future, i had to RMA my crystal ball...

Obviously, we should dismiss your remarks because you are just full of cheese and can't say anything nice about others or the BOB. You just need to write your own reviews and post them. It is darned easy to nitpick someone else when your own contributions are nil.

[SacaSoh]

Obviously, we should dismiss your remarks because you are just full of cheese and can't say anything nice about others or the BOB. You just need to write your own reviews and post them. It is darned easy to nitpick someone else when your own contributions are nil.

Serious, "Nitpick"??? Dude... see what i wrote, i think its very probable that this game reach the awesomeness of the il-2 1946 4.101, but i can't lie to people... in it current state its hard to recommend this game, maybe after the promised perrfomance patches, before the USA launch... But the "review" is like the OP is in debt with Oleg, like he didn't PAID for il-2 and now cliffs of dover...

Just let the review for the next month, after the patches... Probably then the game will deserve a 9.0 score.

[Chivas]

Serious, "Nitpick"??? Dude... see what i wrote, i think its very probable that this game reach the awesomeness of the il-2 1946 4.101, but i can't lie to people... in it current state its hard to recommend this game, maybe after the promised perrfomance patches, before the USA launch... But the "review" is like the OP is in debt with Oleg, like he didn't PAID for il-2 and now cliffs of dover...

Just let the review for the next month, after the patches... Probably then the game will deserve a 9.0 score.

Exactly. The users who reviewed the game should have had enough sense to wait for the patches before throwing the developer under the bus.

[lorddweeb]

This is a bit of a side discussion, but IMO whenever sim people post stuff like "this is a real sim so if you just want to shoot stuff stay with your call of duty kiddyfest" it's a huge turnoff to a potential customer reading your review/post whatever. If your goal is to entice people to play the game it's completely counterproductive.

I play a lot of sims so I see it alot. It happens frequently in the ww2ol community. Often people are trying to be helpful but to a new player it just comes across as smug and superior and cliquish.

[ICDP]

Exactly. The users who reviewed the game should have had enough sense to wait for the patches before throwing the developer under the bus.

It is an utterly ridiculuous proposition to state that a game should not be reviewed until we "wait for the patches". By your logic Il2 would still not be reviewed since it has been patched repeatedly right up until 4.11 and there are still more to come. Or Arma II which is still getting patches, should it have been reviewed when it was released?

It is also a ridiculous notion that somehow it is "our fault" that Cliffs of Dover is not being universaly well received. Somehow the process got swapped on its head. Instead of the publishers and developers being gratefull that we purchased their software, WE the buying public must be gratefull that they ever released it in the first place, no matter what state it is in. We must also be patient and wait for the software to become usable, and while waiting we should lie to others and say it is a sim that deserves 90% as a score? Honestly if I were to recommend CoD to a friend and he tried it we wouldn't be friends very long. Would you be able to live with yourselve the way the OP can even though he is telling other people that CoD is worth 90%.

If someone were to ask you to recommend a good sim that will run well on his two year old PC could you in all conscience recommend Cliffs of Dover? Would you tell him to just fly over the water against three or four aircraft and hope that the developers will "make it better" over the next few years.

If the developers and publishers didn't want "thrown under a bus" for how Cliffs of Dover would be perceived by the "BUYING" public, then they shouldn't have released it in its current state.

P.S. There were plenty of promises made that were not delivered. Oleg and 1C stated many times in various interviews that the AI could not see though clouds... lo and behold, the AI can see through clouds. Right up until the week before the Russian release there were videos showing the SU26, it was cut without so much as a whisper from the devs/publishers. We were told by Luthier and many of his sychophantic fanboys that the sounds were just placeholders, guess what, those shit sounds from the pre-release videos made it into the final version. Don't piss down my back and tell me it is raining.

[iceblink_luck]

The problem is that many (including myself) see this as another nail in the PC games coffin. I do not have the time to go through every thread and try to fix problems that should not be there in the first instance. reviews like this do the game (and PC games in general) no favours. Many people will buy the game on the strength of this very misleading review, play it for a few minutes, realise that it is not fit for purpose and bury it away in the cupboard, never to be played again, and never again will they buy a game from the same developer. (Regardless of whos fault it is..)

You will have the 'hardcore fanboys' on here telling others to 'stop whining'. That is absolutely fine. The truth is that when games like this are released and do not work properly on many capable machines, it kills ongoing sales, irrespective of future patches. First impressions etc.

The majority (NOT the hardcore few) want and expect a finished product when they (we) hand over £30 of our hard earned money - this is not the case with this game. Many will invest their money and time into games that work and do not frustrate - it really is that simple.

Reviews like this should not be allowed to be published - they do the developers no favours in the long run.

[hoarmurath]

Obviously, we should dismiss your remarks because you are just full of cheese and can't say anything nice about others or the BOB. You just need to write your own reviews and post them. It is darned easy to nitpick someone else when your own contributions are nil.

You think you are helping the game, but you totally miss the point. You are actually harming it more than you seem able to imagine.

All you are doing now, is abusing people about the state of the game, so after they buyed it, they will just try it and most probably never touch it again. Will they be waiting for patches? We can wait, for sure, but the newcomer to flightsim will just shelve it.

After reading your review and testing the game, what do they know? They know that the most advanced flight sim to date, as you say, is a worthless unplayable piece of crap. Will it entice them to stay in the genre and try other flight sims, like old IL2? I doubt it. Will they go and say to their friends to try and buy this amazing unworking piece of software? Well, they may recomend it to some people they don't like.

So, your contribution is actually most harmful to the game that the ones of the people that honestly state that in its current state, the game isn't worth buying.

The point is not to make people buy the game, this is the marketing job. Our job as fans, is to make people keep playing. For this, we need a fully fonctional game, in extenso, patched so it's at least playable on recommended rig. It may have some bugs, but anybody with the recommended hardware should be able to take the game out of the box, with default settings, and fly around and shoot things in quick missions.

[Davy TASB]

Eurogamer Denmark will not give the game a bad review "out of respect for the talented team who created the game"

They just wont review it at all (at the moment) and firmly point the finger of blame at UBI.
http://www.cleared-to-engage.com/2011/03/31/eurogamer-denmark-will-not-review-cliffs-of-dover/

[Buchon]

Really Ubi was messed up again releasing a product early.

But under other point of view I can enjoy playing this beta until gets patched, which it will.

When IL-2 Forgotten Battles went out was a mess too, but the development was never stoped, it did grow and grow until become to the Gran Turismo of the PC combat flight simulators.

Because this game is not those annual low level car games that you play a few hours and then throw to the garbage ... to wait for the next year version.

This is IL-2.

The team are now adressing the performance problems, next step is bug fixing and then ... the sky is the limit ;)

[Komrad]

The low reviews are a total travesty and have accomplished nothing but drive people away from our already weak genre. I'm a huge fan and have alot of respect for what Maddox games has delivered over the last 10 years for our community. I have no respect for those people who have shown absolutely no foresight, with their rating. They will be proven wrong in spades, but much damage has already been done to our community and genre. Luckily a few of the professional reviewers have shown some intelligence and have delayed their reviews until the game is patched.

The only people responsible for driving people away from this game (if that happens) are the same people who made the ill judged decision to release this game in the condition that it is in at the moment.

Sure there are fun things about it, no doubt about that, but there are too many things wrong with it for the average gamer to just pick it up and say wow I must recommend this to my friends.

It's almost as if UBI or MG or 1C or whoever is responsible for this release said to themselves lets just release it anyway, we know the flight sim community trust us to patch the game to standards they expect.

Well that's all very well for the established community, but if they think that will bring new players into the genre then forget it.

People are entitled to review a game how they see it, ultimately the reviews wont lie, it's as simple as that.

p.s, personally I would rate this game at the moment a 6.5, after the next few patches it could well go up to 8 or 9, lets hope it does.


Bryan.

[BadAim]

I for one didn't see anything but honesty in the review, if anyone might have been mislead by the rating number, the review left nothing to complain about. If people are buying games based on a single number from a single source, I'll be happy have their money go towards making my flightsim perfect. I just hope that they have the good sense to try it again in a couple of weeks.

Yep, it's buggy, but it's glorious!