Interview with Ilya (translation please)

[conio]

Can any of the russian speakers, please translate the main points of this interview?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxT9rhkl9Cs

[Plt Off JRB Meaker]

Moderator edit.

Insulting comment removed

.

[Richie]

I just want to hear his answers to the important questions. Maybe there's a Russian forum with this with a translation but that seems backwards doesn't it?

[BlackSix]

They mostly talked about the online Championships, which took place on this site - aviachamp.ru (http://aviachamp.ru/)
Also, the development of various online projects based on the game. There were no new facts about the future projects.
The interview lasted 35 minutes and I can not tell it all in detail.

[Richie]

Thanks BlackSix

[Ataros]

The main facts are they are eager to support the series for at least 10 years. The new engine unlike the old IL-2 one allows replacement of complete modules and sub-modules like happens with sound now. On the other hand this fact made the core engine so complex and so hard to develop from scratch (and hunt all the bugs).

Also there are plans to include features that would allow the series to have some good cybersport application (they try to borrow some cybersport-related ideas from Starcraft).

SDK can be available only after the aircrafts are finalised because the documentation for the SDK can be written only by the chief aircraft programmer and will take about 4 months to write. Thus he has to stop his work on aircrafts first.

Disclaimer: this is not word by word translation but just my interpretation.

[Ataros]

My personal opinion on SDK is that we have to ask the devs at least to provide a limited SDK for maps and ground units to allow making some basic gunsights for AAA and tanks (e.g. similar to WoT game). Frankly I do not think work of the aircraft programmer on aircraft would ever stop because publishers will push for a new theatre after BoM. La-5 model is made for Stalingrad or Kursk as far as I understand.

[jg27_mc]

The main facts are they are eager to support the series for at least 10 years. The new engine unlike the old IL-2 one allows replacement of complete modules and sub-modules like happens with sound now. On the other hand this fact made the core engine so complex and so hard to develop from scratch (and hunt all the bugs).

Also there are plans to include features that would allow the series to have some good cybersport application (they try to borrow some cybersport-related ideas from Starcraft).

SDK can be available only after the aircrafts are finalised because the documentation for the SDK can be written only by the chief aircraft programmer and will take about 4 months to write. Thus he has to stop his work on aircrafts first.

Disclaimer: this is not word by word translation but just my interpretation.

TY Sir for transmitting the general ideas of the interview.

Regards.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Frankly I do not think work of the aircraft programmer on aircraft would ever stop because publishers will push for a new theatre after BoM.

+1

Also people tend to discount the time taken to create documentation like user manuals. Especially in this case where I expect any documentation would be written in Russian and then they would need to find a translator fluent with a grasp of the appropriate technical language.

As an example Australia Navy recently introduced the MU90 Light Weight Torpedo. There was a significant holdup in their deployment as French and Italian data and test reports of the weapon system were supplied in their original languages.

Not only did they need to have excelent French/Italian/English technical translation skills they also had to have the appropriate security clearance! It took them a long time to find one!

Cheers!

[Flanker35M]

S!

Thanks Ataros and Black6 for the snippets.

[Ataros]

Another thing I did not mention is time to create a new aircraft in original Il-2 was 1 month for 2 people. In CloD it is 9 months for 2 people.

Thus almost 10 times more time/resources is needed for creation as well is for bug hunting.

[addman]

Another thing I did not mention is time to create a new aircraft in original Il-2 was 1 month for 2 people. In CloD it is 9 months for 2 people.

Thus almost 10 times more time/resources is needed for creation as well is for bug hunting.

As I suspected. The developers (Polyphony Digital) of Gran Turismo 5 had the very same problem and that's one of the main reasons that game was delayed for so long. Of course they have a much bigger dev team than MG but they also had to create hundreds of licensed cars with manufacturers breathing down their necks making sure their models were faithfully represented.

I think some people don't really grasp this around here, if we get one extra plane in a patch then that would be a luxury for us. I'm not even expecting ANY new planes in patches, it will probably most likely be DLC further down the road considering the amount of resources/manpower it takes to produce new aircraft. I actually fully support a DLC implementation for the new IL-2 series, it's a good way to keep the cash flow for MG and hopefully one can pick and choose what one would like to download instead of getting unwanted crap planes, the Lerche springs to mind.

[trumps]

I am definately a fan of the RoF DLC type system, for add-on aircraft to existing theatres. I am amazed at peoples assumption that any extra aircraft developed down the track should be passed on for free, especially these days with the time and effort required to produce them to the standard the we all expect. And yes, the idiot planes like the lerch and some others should not have the time and effort wasted on them, and I dare say wouldn't if they were produced as money earning products!

Craig

[addman]

I am definately a fan of the RoF DLC type system, for add-on aircraft to existing theatres. I am amazed at peoples assumption that any extra aircraft developed down the track should be passed on for free, especially these days with the time and effort required to produce them to the standard the we all expect. And yes, the idiot planes like the lerch and some others should not have the time and effort wasted on them, and I dare say wouldn't if they were produced as money earning products!

Craig

^
This and also the fact that planes are no longer modeled in < 800 polygons with questionable attention to detail. Just look at the engine on the Walrus in CloD and compare it to the MBR-2 in IL-2, yeah quite a difference eh? The time it takes for 2 people to create one aircraft model CloD is not weird at all, it's reality.

[Untamo]

Thanks to ataros for translation!

Comment to DLC:
Imagine you have bought CloD, with its E-3, E-4 Bfs and Mk I & II Spits etc. Then you go to a server that runs a year 43 eastern front mission. Choose a field. Nope, no planes available, go to online shop to buy them. Ok, I'll go play Skyrim or something :)

Old series did it real good. But yes, they can leave the UFOs out from the coming theatre packs :)

[Skoshi Tiger]

There is nothing wrong with paying for DLC. ROF shows that it's a good model of business. Even though I don't fly it that often I've 'Collected' a number of their planes.

How about the DCS series where you have to buy a whole new simulator for each flyable aircraft?

I'ld have no issue with buying a Battle of Moscow expansion whith new maps and aircraft to suit.

[jayrc]

I'd rather buy an addon with new planes and map than having to buy each plane individually like rise of flight, matter of fact, I play rise of flight iron cross edition and have never bought one of there planes!

[trumps]

I like the idea of theatre packs with say maps, missions, and initial aircraft plane set, if down the track there are extra aircraft developed then that is cool, I will buy them but they are not essential to making that theatre pack playable.
I have RoF IC, I rarely play it as it still requires more utility aircraft to flesh out the great new campaign system for me to get right into it. I still buy pretty much every extra plane they release though, I will get right into it oneday, and still want to do my bit to keep anyone that has an interest in developing flight sims in business. $15 every 2-3 months is still a pretty small price to pay for someting we all enjoy so much!

Craig

[klem]

I'd rather buy an addon with new planes and map than having to buy each plane individually like rise of flight, matter of fact, I play rise of flight iron cross edition and have never bought one of there planes!

+1

I think thats the way it will go. I don't agree with the 'buy it or be left out' philosophy across individual planes. It will put too many people at a disadvantage and we won't have a level playing field. I didn't like this in RoF, you are almost forced to buy everything to take part in mission variations or 'sit at the back' with an irrelevant aircraft.

[TomcatViP]

+1

I think thats the way it will go. I don't agree with the 'buy it or be left out' philosophy across individual planes. It will put too many people at a disadvantage and we won't have a level playing field. I didn't like this in RoF, you are almost forced to buy everything to take part in mission variations or 'sit at the back' with an irrelevant aircraft.

+1

RoF team lost all credibility the day they fall in that trap. They even lost their business model (realism). I hope for them they made some good money at least.

[Red Dragon-DK]

There is nothing wrong with paying for DLC. ROF shows that it's a good model of business. Even though I don't fly it that often I've 'Collected' a number of their planes.

How about the DCS series where you have to buy a whole new simulator for each flyable aircraft?

I'ld have no issue with buying a Battle of Moscow expansion whith new maps and aircraft to suit.

There is evreything wrong with that Model. It makes a lot of people stay away and the hole game a to Fr.....g expensive. I think its a stupid model. And thats way I do not play EVE, WOW and ROF.

I dont know why some type of people just want to pay more for a game. WHY? Do you have a lot of money, you dont know how to spend? A god product will aways sell. Payed Expantions is the way in my humble opinion. Like merged vertions as in IL2. I would pay for those.

Mybye Im look like one, but Im realy not - honestly

http://i345.photobucket.com/albums/p383/IIJG53_Otto/milking-cow.jpg

[von Pilsner]

I own RoF and have purchased a few planes (haven't played in a while though).

My fear is that that business model could steer the focus of the company into making planes, sights, lights and gauges for their income and not working on general updates as much (as they are free and don't pay).

I suppose after we have everything in-game working great, SDK(s) and more theaters (expansions) it could become a good business model to 'flesh out' the sim, but I prefer the larger expansions.

[Skoshi Tiger]

There is evreything wrong with that Model. It makes a lot of people stay away and the hole game a to Fr.....g expensive. I think its a stupid model. And thats way I do not play EVE, WOW and ROF.

I dont know why some type of people just want to pay more for a game. WHY? Do you have a lot of money, you dont know how to spend? A god product will aways sell. Payed Expantions is the way in my humble opinion. Like merged vertions as in IL2. I would pay for those.

Mybye Im look like one, but Im realy not - honestly

http://i345.photobucket.com/albums/p383/IIJG53_Otto/milking-cow.jpg

Never played EVE and not into WOW so as I have never played them or purchased them so I can not comment on anything to do with them.

To me, ROF is a good WW1 Flight sim that doesn't make me pay for the planes I will never fly. In my opinion there is nothing wrong with that, considering that they don't even charge for the sim any more.

If your not into the era or don't like the game or are just boycotting one of the few Combat AV Sim developers that making up to date games as a protest on their marketing model then that just peachy keen with me. But if they are making enough money to continue development of their product then in my opinion it's a good model. If people didn't think was good value they'ld go broke. Wouldn't they?

That said I don't think it's the only good marketing model out there. Just like you've stated, I'd prefered a paid addon that will merge with the existing game, just like the old IL2.

If it turned into pay for play payment system I'll join you in the protest.

Cheers!

[klem]

Never played EVE and not into WOW so as I have never played them or purchased them so I can not comment on anything to do with them.

To me, ROF is a good WW1 Flight sim that doesn't make me pay for the planes I will never fly. In my opinion there is nothing wrong with that, considering that they don't even charge for the sim any more.

If your not into the era or don't like the game or are just boycotting one of the few Combat AV Sim developers that making up to date games as a protest on their marketing model then that just peachy keen with me. But if they are making enough money to continue development of their product then in my opinion it's a good model. If people didn't think was good value they'ld go broke. Wouldn't they?

That said I don't think it's the only good marketing model out there. Just like you've stated, I'd prefered a paid addon that will merge with the existing game, just like the old IL2.

If it turned into pay for play payment system I'll join you in the protest.

Cheers!

I'd subscribe to a server that could handle two or three hundred players on line so we could have some really major scenarios but thats all.

[Red Dragon-DK]

I have nothing agains paying for a game at all. What im agains is simply to they are add new planes for you to buy all the time instead of making an addon with new objekts, maps aircraft ect... I just belive thats more fair.

I am aware that it is my choice, whether I want to buy a new aircraft or not. But I like to try out what I'm up against, and therefore fly enemy aircraft occasionally. That I can only if I buy it.

IL2 and their add-on was an excellent thing. Your sim was expanded continuously and that way the game was complete. All had the same aircraft and had the same choice. When the new Russian front is coming, I surely it will merge with Clod. If not I will concider buying it, or wait for a second front. I do not want 5 or 10 different games, each with its own front. It takes up too much space and is to impractical I think.

With peace and bacon ;)

[TheGrunch]

If people didn't think was good value they'ld go broke. Wouldn't they?

I don't have much problem with RoF's business model, but I have to say that this point in particular is pretty moot since there isn't another WWI sim of a similar quality and fidelity or even the prospect of such out there. They are for all intents and purposes in a monopoly position. The only reason they aren't charging horrendous amounts is because games are a luxury that most of us do without when we think the prices are unreasonable.

[dali]

the guy on the left looks like Rasputin :)

[flyingblind]

When it comes to generating income from a game I suppose the biggest difference between ROF and IL2 is that ROF operates in a limited theatre over the Western Front. There just aren't the opportunities to created additional maps so all they can do is sell planes. IL2 on the other hand represents a truly world war with a number of seperate areas of operations that can be used as a base for stand alone or merged updates. The different approaches suite the different games.

[trumps]

The only reason RoF is limited to it's present AO is because that is what the devs have decided to stick with, the Air war in WWI was a lot more extensive than many people realize!

Craig