BoBII discussion thread

[philip.ed]

That depends on my other options. If I have other options I would expect it to be ready at release. If I don't have other options then I'm going to have no choice but to wait (and spend every day trolling their message board).


Just thought I should add that there are options. BoB2 has better AI, better comms, and a much better campaign system and single missions which are leaps and bounds over CloD. So with this in mind, you advocate that this should have all been available at release? Interesting.

Please could this post not be removed, as I feel it is useful for anyone who has never played BoB2. In terms of gameplay, it's the best Battle of Britain game on the market at the moment.

[IamNotDavid]

Just thought I should add that there are options. BoB2 has better AI, better comms, and a much better campaign system and single missions which are leaps and bounds over CloD. So with this in mind, you advocate that this should have all been available at release? Interesting.

Please could this post not be removed, as I feel it is useful for anyone who has never played BoB2. In terms of gameplay, it's the best Battle of Britain game on the market at the moment.

Why aren't the complainers busy playing BoB2 instead of posting here? I think WoP was a waste of my money, but I don't spend all my time complaining on their message board. In fact, I've never been on their message board.

[Insuber]

Just thought I should add that there are options. BoB2 has better AI, better comms, and a much better campaign system and single missions which are leaps and bounds over CloD. So with this in mind, you advocate that this should have all been available at release? Interesting.

Please could this post not be removed, as I feel it is useful for anyone who has never played BoB2. In terms of gameplay, it's the best Battle of Britain game on the market at the moment.

I used to play it for a while 10 years ago, and then tried all of the the successive reincarnations, and mods, but the lack of multiplay and the old graphics had me quit it long time ago in favor of Il2. The best thing I remember were the large formations of bomber and escort fighters.
Anyway I don't understand the purpose of speaking about BoB II in this thread.

Cheers,
Ins.

[addman]

Just thought I should add that there are options. BoB2 has better AI, better comms, and a much better campaign system and single missions which are leaps and bounds over CloD. So with this in mind, you advocate that this should have all been available at release? Interesting.

Please could this post not be removed, as I feel it is useful for anyone who has never played BoB2. In terms of gameplay, it's the best Battle of Britain game on the market at the moment.

For me it's the feel of flight that draws -and has always drawn- me to the il-2 series. After I played the very first IL-2 demo, European Air War and Jane's WWII Fighters became instantly obsolete. I couldn't go back to them even though I loved EAW's campaigns and enjoyed the FMB of WWII Fighters very much. I now face the same "problem" with IL-2 CloD, the immersion of flying over the channel on a misty summer morning is unbeatable. The feel of flight, the gorgeous cockpits, the great lightning, the new sounds. It's one fantastic combat sim BUT it sorely lacks in content and features which unfortunately has made me stop caring about it. I have no interest at all in flying it at the moment and the sad thing is going back to old IL-2 is impossible when you know how superior CloD is in many ways, I'm stuck in between the old and the new, it's a horrible thing and it makes me wish I hadn't bought CloD at all and at the same time I feel the total opposite. It's a weird situation.:-?

On a brighter note, I'm now really stoked about BoM and I hope it will rekindle my interest in the series and hook me just as IL-2 did 10 years ago!:)

[philip.ed]

I used to play it for a while 10 years ago, and then tried all of the the successive reincarnations, and mods, but the lack of multiplay and the old graphics had me quit it long time ago in favor of Il2. The best thing I remember were the large formations of bomber and escort fighters.
Anyway I don't understand the purpose of speaking about BoB II in this thread.

Cheers,
Ins.

The purpose is that IAmNotDavid said that: 'If I have other options I would expect it to be ready at release'. He was suggesting that if there was anything comparable to CloD, then the features Furbs et al previously mentioned would need to have been included in the release. The truth is they are available, as I demonstrated, which makes his jab at Furbs slightly ironic.

[IamNotDavid]

The purpose is that IAmNotDavid said that: 'If I have other options I would expect it to be ready at release'. He was suggesting that if there was anything comparable to CloD, then the features Furbs et al previously mentioned would need to have been included in the release. The truth is they are available, as I demonstrated, which makes his jab at Furbs slightly ironic.

To which I responded, if another option is available you should be playing that game instead of constantly complaining about this one.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Just thought I should add that there are options. BoB2 has better AI, better comms, and a much better campaign system and single missions which are leaps and bounds over CloD. So with this in mind, you advocate that this should have all been available at release? Interesting.

Please could this post not be removed, as I feel it is useful for anyone who has never played BoB2. In terms of gameplay, it's the best Battle of Britain game on the market at the moment.
I feel it is important too.. but you have to consider both sides of the coin to be fair

BoB II like BoB I is not what I and many others would consider a bench mark flight sim..

In 2005 Shockwave took Rowan's 2001 BoB I code and basically upgraded the graphics engine and REMOVED what little online play it had! But don't take my word for it! i.e.

eurogamer Review of BoB II (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/r_battleofbritain2wov_pc)
'Potentially excellent' is not a phrase we thought we'd be using in this review; it's not a phrase we hoped we'd be using in this review. Because Wings of Victory is basically a beautified re-release of a much-loved five-year-old air combat classic (Rowan's Battle of Britain) excellence should really have come as standard. Instead Shockwave, in the process of adding attractive new aircraft models, cockpits, scenery and particle effects appear to have introduced a swarm of new bugs too.

If these bugs were small - a misaligned texture here, a briefing typo there - then we'd happily forgive and forget. Sadly they are actually rather large - lock-ups, crashes, mysteriously low frame-rates

----

A sky full of droning Dorniers is a truly awesome sight and something you won't have seen the like of in other sims. Unfortunately it also seems to be a cue for some of those crashes and frame-rate slumps we mentioned earlier.

----

Watching frame-rates nosedive or seeing your icon-strewn desktop pop-up as you plunge, guns blazing into a swarm of Luftwaffe bombers doesn't do a whole lot for immersion

----

In a debatable step Shockwave has chosen to remove the unreliable multiplayer mode that featured in the original title rather than repair it

And

GAME HUB Review of BoB II (http://bobgamehub.blogspot.com/p/bobii-review.html)
In 2005 Shockwave Productions, having obtained the rights to the BOB code, released BOB II, Wings of Victory.

Like a new pilot taking off without setting his prop pitch though, it stalled on take-off. Arguably, it took four patches and nearly a year before it was stable and playable for the majority of gamers, due to similar stability issues which had plagued the original release.

----

There is no online mode, which many players regard as a core element of any modern combat game. And there is virtually no way for users to create and share their own missions
Those are just some of the reasons why I and many others don't consder BoB I or BoB II a bench mark flight sim

As for the offline play and AI..

All I can say is IT BETTER BE GOOD! in light of the fact that there is NO ONLINE play!

It's too bad Shockwave had this late 1990s mentality in 2005. Granted in the 90s online was in it infancy (read exception to the rule unless a pay-to-play sim) but that mind set had long gone the way of the dinosaur by 2005! Where the emphases switched from AI and offline campaigns to smooth online multiplayer coops and campaigns.

I know I know I know..

You want both!

And in a perfect world where nobody grows old, money grows on trees, people work for free and the market has no influence on the products you produce.. we could have both.. but here in the real world there is only so much time and money and the market demands online play over offline campaigns. Which explains why CoD and so many other flight sims have pushed offline play to the back burner.

[kendo65]

Come on Aces, your blanket approach to dousing even the most moderate and constructive criticism of the game is really tiring. You seem to have a stone-wall, not-an-inch mentality regarding acknowledging ANY aspects of CoD that could be improved. This is despite the devs themselves making an appeal for advice on improving the AI.

Philip and others have made good points about specific features (AI, campaign) in BOB 2 that in their opinion could be useful for CoD's future development. And instead of acknowledging that you muddy the water again by finding other aspects of BOB 2 to criticise.

I don't see how you can believe you are advancing the future of CoD or BoM by having such a closed minded attitude.

Just to be clear - no-one is saying that BOB 2 is better in every aspect or more advanced than CoD, or that they necessarily prefer playing it in 2012 so all those criticisms are attacking the wrong issue. The point is that in some specific aspects it is very good. And those specific areas are ones that many people, including apparently the devs, feel that CoD needs to be improved.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Come on Aces, your blanket approach to dousing even the most moderate and constructive criticism of the game is really tiring.
Sorry if my 'glass half full' approach is in conflict with you and yours 'glass half empty' approach

But as I pointed out, you have to look at both sides of the coin in every case to be fair

For example I think this line is very telling..

GAME HUB Review of BoB II (http://bobgamehub.blogspot.com/p/bobii-review.html) it took four patches and nearly a year before it was stable and playable for the majority of gamers, due to similar stability issues which had plagued the original release.

That is in reference to the BoB II sim that some would have us belive is the bench mark of BoB sims.. Does that description sound familiar to you in anyway? Maybe not to you and yours, but I think others who may be on the fence will read that and realize that CoD has not been out for a year yet and that maybe they will come down off the fence onto the 'glass half full' side as aposed to your side

Again, sorry if that 'approach' gets in the way of your 'approach'

[Trumper]

Just a factual point as i personally have both sims on my h/d and each has it's good and bad points.
There is a patch being worked on in BoB 11 and a re write of the campaigns in progress.
BoB11 is an old engine and worked on by volunteers for nothing so really can't be compared to a modern brand new program with a professional team of full time developers.
I don't see why BoB 11 is being dragged into this,having both is a win/win situation.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

BoB11 is an old engine and worked on by volunteers for nothing so really can't be compared to a modern brand new program with a professional team of full time developers.
That depends..

IMHO it would not be fair to compare BoB II's graphics to CoD graphics..

But I think it is 'ok' to compare BoB II's AI and campaign to CoDs! Note I said 'ok' not 'fair'.

Why?

Because something happened years ago.. online game play.. Since than there has been more and more 'resources' (time & money) devoted to online play than offline play. Some big game makers have enough 'resources' to do both.. But as we all know flight sims have limited 'resources' realitive to other games.. Thus they have to focus on the market demands.. And the sad truth of that is more people care about online gameplay against other human pilots than offline AI and campaigns

I miss the games like SWOTL and RB where the offline campaign pulled you in and made you feel apart of what was going on.. But to be honest, if I had to choose between the two I would pick online play over offline play wrt flight sims. Note I said if I had to choose, that is based on me knowing flight sims makers have limited 'resources'. It would be great to have both, but clearly that is not the case

Thus long story short.. It is not fair to compare BoB II's AI and Offline to CoD for the reasons I noted above.. Which is not to say that I think BoB II's AI is better, just pointing out that it is not fair IMHO to compare a flight sim who focus is on OFFLINE play such that they didn't even include ONLINE play to CoD who's focus, like so many modern sims, is on ONLINE play

Just my 2 cents

[ACE-OF-ACES]

i think it was Oleg himself who said his flight sims focus on offline players.
Well as the glass half empty crowd likes to point out.. Oleg said alot of things that have not come to be.. yet

But it really does not mater if he did say that, because the truth (nay FACT) of the mater is prior to ONLINE play.. Game makers had no choice but to put ALL of thier focus into OFFLINE play..

Where as today game makers have to SPLIT thier focus between OFFLINE and ONLINE play..

Which for flight sims means they have to SPLIT thier 'resorces' (time & money) to do BOTH..

And since the market demands ONLINE plany over OFFLINE play you can 'be sure' the spilt is not 50 50 ;)

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Agree, professional developers creating a brand new program should do much better in much less time than a group of semi-trained volunteers.
Just to be crystal..

All the links I provided are realitive to the 2005 Shockwave Productions, Inc. (currently known as A2A simulaton) release of BoB II.. Not the work done by modders since that date

[furbs]

What is the split would you say ACE?

[ACE-OF-ACES]

What is the split would you say ACE?
Your guess is as good as mine..

But don't get hung up on the split number..

The point to take away from all this is we know there is a split.. How much it is not as important as knowing there is one..

Which brings us back to square one

Do you think it is fair to compare the AI and OFFLINE Campain of a game that only focuses on OFFLINE to a game that trys to do both OFFLINE and ONLINE?

Personally I think not..

Unless the comparison is to say.. See how much better CoD's AI and OFFLINE Campain could be if CoD dropped ONLINE support and only focuesed on OFFLINE play

But as I allready noted.. The market drives these calls more than we would like to admit.. And todays market is more interested in ONLINE gamming than OFFLINE.. It is too bad really.. Because I can remember the detail of the OFFLINE campains in Red Barron.. The way you would progress threw the war.. And made you feel like you were having an effect on events.. For example, if you did good.. An enmy ace would 'challange' you to a duel! As in meet me in grid such and such at high noon.. Stuff like that really made pulled you into what was going on.. Where as todays OFFLINE campains.. in most games.. Enh.. They don't really draw you in like that anymore IMHO.. I have not tried RoF offline yet, I hear it has alot of that kind of stuff going on.

[kendo65]

That depends..

IMHO it would not be fair to compare BoB II's graphics to CoD graphics..

But I think it is 'ok' to compare BoB II's AI and campaign to CoDs! Note I said 'ok' not 'fair'.

Why?

Because something happened years ago.. online game play.. Since than there has been more and more 'resources' (time & money) devoted to online play than offline play. Some big game makers have enough 'resources' to do both.. But as we all know flight sims have limited 'resources' realitive to other games.. Thus they have to focus on the market demands.. And the sad truth of that is more people care about online gameplay against other human pilots than offline AI and campaigns

I miss the games like SWOTL and RB where the offline campaign pulled you in and made you feel apart of what was going on.. But to be honest, if I had to choose between the two I would pick online play over offline play wrt flight sims. Note I said if I had to choose, that is based on me knowing flight sims makers have limited 'resources'. It would be great to have both, but clearly that is not the case

Thus long story short.. It is not fair to compare BoB II's AI and Offline to CoD for the reasons I noted above.. Which is not to say that I think BoB II's AI is better, just pointing out that it is not fair IMHO to compare a flight sim who focus is on OFFLINE play such that they didn't even include ONLINE play to CoD who's focus, like so many modern sims, is on ONLINE play

Just my 2 cents

Firstly, has any definitive research been done on the proportions of online to offline players for an established, successful flight-sim like il-2? I suspect the numbers would be close, with possibly even a majority for offline. I would also say that the online crowd are more easily visible and high-profile, but whether that means they are more numerous I don't know. As Furbs says, for the sake of CoD I would hope that there are at least as many playing offline (or temporarily inactive but interested in future developments) as are currently online. Also, beware the self-fulfilling prophecy of settling for a poor offline experience with no campaign, losing all those interested in offline play, then concluding that the numbers are all online and that is all that matters.

It is not fair to compare BoB II's AI and Offline to CoD for the reasons I noted above.. Which is not to say that I think BoB II's AI is better, just pointing out that it is not fair IMHO to compare a flight sim who focus is on OFFLINE play such that they didn't even include ONLINE play to CoD who's focus, like so many modern sims, is on ONLINE play

It's not about 'fairness' or even comparing the two games for that matter. You get so defensive about CoD. This isn't about saying game X is better than game Y. Here is the situation: CoD (fantastically wonderful as we all agree it is ;)) requires further development in several key areas. The question is what form should that development take? What sort of standard should we aim at? Someone suggests that a previous game did a good job in certain limited aspects of its development and suggests that if CoD was developed along similar lines in those specific areas it might be really good.

It's just logic. Answer these questions:

1. Is COD currently perfect?
2. If not, which aspects would you like to see improved?

It seems in your world that anyone answering 'no' to the first question gets labelled as one of the 'glass half empty' crowd.

[philip.ed]

Your guess is as good as mine..

But don't get hung up on the split number..

The point to take away from all this is we know there is a split.. How much it is not as important as knowing there is one..

Which brings us back to square one

Do you think it is fair to compare the AI and OFFLINE Campain of a game that only focuses on OFFLINE to a game that trys to do both OFFLINE and ONLINE?

Personally I think not..

Unless the comparison is to say.. See how much better CoD's AI and OFFLINE Campain could be if CoD dropped ONLINE support and only focuesed on OFFLINE play

But as I allready noted.. The market drives these calls more than we would like to admit.. And todays market is more interested in ONLINE gamming than OFFLINE.. It is too bad really.. Because I can remember the detail of the OFFLINE campains in Red Barron.. The way you would progress threw the war.. And made you feel like you were having an effect on events.. For example, if you did good.. An enmy ace would 'challange' you to a duel! As in meet me in grid such and such at high noon.. Stuff like that really made pulled you into what was going on.. Where as todays OFFLINE campains.. in most games.. Enh.. They don't really draw you in like that anymore IMHO.. I have not tried RoF offline yet, I hear it has alot of that kind of stuff going on.


Why aren't they comparable? I am struggling to see why you believe a 6-7 year old game with a brilliant offline experience cannot be compared to a game released in 2011 which, as the developers expressed, would be the greatest sim in all departments: offline included. Up until release we were led to believe the AI would be something special: it would have it's own character. We were even told it would feel fear. In six years, technology comes a long way. BoB2 does have mutiplayer. It's just not a multiplayer game. There is nothing about CloD that means it can't rival Bob2, so your argument that the two are incomparable is negateable. It has no substance.

As others have said to, the origins of both sims are in no way similar. CloD is supported by paid developers. Bob2 is supported by unpaid community members, and has been for a very long time. But it doesn't matter. At the end of the day, offline games and online games are NOT mutually exclusive. They can happily exist together.

There is no reason to suggest that CloD can't equal BoB2. Even if we focus on BoB2's single-player missions, the developers had every opportunity to ensure that each mission they created was as close to historical events (of that particular day) as possible. They had every opportunity to make the AI perfect. They had every opporunity to ensure all the skins were correct. They had every opporunity to create a dynamic campaign, or to enable the game to run smoothly with large numbers of A/C, or to create an immersive comms system. The fact that they failed and that CloD's main selling point is the online experience does not automatically negate any comparisons to mainly offline games. No, no. In fact, the fact that it failed when it should have achieved makes the comparisons all the more successful. It gives CloD a benchmark to reach.

I can't see why you think the two aren't comparable. Your logic is illogical. In this instance, Oleg's advocation that offline is important ultimately shows that your argument is considerably weak.

Kendo is absolutely right. No one is saying that X is better than Y. We are saying that one is better in certain areas and that the other can look to improve on these departments. The history of the games makes no difference. At the end of the day, CloD should have a brilliant offline experience and it doesn't. Bob2 does and will contain my passion for the period. I would love CLoD to achieve, and I believe it can, and consequently I suggest it take a leaf out of BoB2's book.

don't bring online into this, I can't see why that had to be brought up. It's totally irrelevent to the argument: especially when the argument relates to a six year old game. Technology has come a long way in six years. BoB2 just chose to focus on offline gaming. It could have branched out online, but chose not to. It is as simple as that.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Why aren't they comparable?
Simple really..

It is not a fair comparison..

Because BoB II is an OFFLINE only game..

The point being one would 'expect' a game that puts all their resources into OFFLINE play (developing the AI and a campaign) to have better OFFLINE play than a game that has to SPLIT their resources to provide both OFFLINE and ONLINE capabilities

[fruitbat]

How about comparing CloD to il21946, a 10 year old game, where the offline is much much better?

I am led to belive that does online too.....:rolleyes:

[ACE-OF-ACES]

How about comparing CloD to il21946, a 10 year old game, where the offline is much much better?

I am led to belive that does online too.....:rolleyes:
That would be fair IMHO..

And debatable! ;)

[fruitbat]

That would be fair IMHO..

And debatable! ;)

If 4.11 delivers, to which i have high hopes, its likely to be the best ai out there....

admittedly version 1.00 wasn't so hot.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

It's not about 'fairness' or even comparing the two games for that matter. You get so defensive about CoD.
With regards to fairness, disagree 100%, but you are welcome to your opinion. As for me being defensive, Hardly, it is a simple case of you confusing 'defense' with me providing another point of view.. a different perspective.. or in this case the flip side of the coin that is BoB II to show it was not all that some would have us belive. I also went as far as to include links that show it took the makers of BoB II (Shockwave) OVER A YEAR to fix all the bugs such that it was a playable game.. To give the current crop of CoD gloom'n'doomers some 'prospective' on how all new games have issues at the start.. Even the BoB II that some hold up as the BENCH MARK of flight sims

[ACE-OF-ACES]

If 4.11 delivers, to which i have high hopes, its likely to be the best ai out there....

admittedly version 1.00 wasn't so hot.
Agreed.. Did you see that new bomber gunners video? Amazing how they now wont shoot if there is a friendly plane behind the enmy plane they are shooting at.. Realy cool stuff!

[fruitbat]

Agreed.. Did you see that new bomber gunners video? Amazing how they now wont shoot if there is a friendly plane behind the enmy plane they are shooting at.. Realy cool stuff!

yup, seen all the vids, teamd's channel is bookmarked!

My personal fav feature re the ai is ai rear gunners no longer being able to fire under heavy g load, will be a revelation, not to mention hiding in clouds etc.

Did you see this vid, at 4:10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcvrCfErUr4&feature=player_embedded

watch how the ai attacks, mmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[nearmiss]

Just thought I should add that there are options. BoB2 has better AI, better comms, and a much better campaign system and single missions which are leaps and bounds over CloD. So with this in mind, you advocate that this should have all been available at release? Interesting.

Please could this post not be removed, as I feel it is useful for anyone who has never played BoB2. In terms of gameplay, it's the best Battle of Britain game on the market at the moment.

I don't understand responses to iamnotdavid.

Does he own the COD or IL2?

In fact, he never gives any information that would infer he has either. Has anyone ever read any of his postings that were a actual discussion of using either?

This is off topic forums and this topic for discussion is fine here.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

watch how the ai attacks, mmmmmmmmmmmmmm
You can really see the difference between ACE and AVERAGE now.. The only thing I didn't like.. call me petty.. but did you notice how the AI stopped shooting once a major part of the plane was damaged.. For example when the elevator is damaged.. The plane is still manuvering.. or should I say moving? There is no visual indicator that the plane has been damaged such that the pilot can no longer manaver.. But the AI seems to know it and breaks off.. That is the only thing I saw that would imidetly indicate that was AI and not a real pilot.. Because a real pilot would have not know the elevator was out and continued to fire until he noticed the plane was no longer able to manuver

[philip.ed]

I don't understand responses to iamnotdavid.

Does he own the COD or IL2?

In fact, he never gives any information that would infer he has either. Has anyone ever read any of his postings that were a actual discussion of using either?

This is off topic forums and this topic for discussion is fine here.

The response was thus because he said something about the complaints against CloD's AI being pointless if there was no comparison. I chipped in and said that actually there was a comparison, which currently has the best AI and arguably the best campaign system in any WW2 Aerial combat sim played by people today.


AoA: you are wrong. Bob2 does have online. Albeit the system is extremely poor, but it does work. It does exactly what it says on the tin. Take a look at the A2A website if you like.


The two are comparable because CloD is leaps and bounds over BoB2 in terms of technology. It could be as good as it offline easily, so why isn't it? It was in development for longer, probably has a larger team behind it with more resources and more community support, so there is no credible reason why it isn't as good. The point is, I want CLoD to be as good as BoB2 offline. I love the latter game, but it is old and CloD could be a worthy successor. The two are not mutually exclusive; i can enjoy them equally, but because of this I can compare them equally.

CloD has an online and offline experience. So does Bob2. For someone who gets as literal as you, there is your answer. No one is holding Bob2 as the benchmark of flight-sims. You go way too far in analyses for them to warrant any intelligent attention.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Offline or online shouldn't matter, as both their subjects are the same Battle of Britain, and both are simulators. If CoD didn't have AI, then it would be a valid argument, but as it has the same component that BoBII does, it is interesting to compare, and even hope that eventually CoD can get as competent in that department.
If I gave you the impression that you could not compare the two.. Please forgive me that was not my intent.. All I am saying is it is no fair to compare the two for the reasons I stated

[IamNotDavid]

I don't understand responses to iamnotdavid.

Does he own the COD or IL2?

In fact, he never gives any information that would infer he has either. Has anyone ever read any of his postings that were a actual discussion of using either?

This is off topic forums and this topic for discussion is fine here.

I have both. I don't play IL2 at all since I got RoF. I'm playing CoD offline until it is fixed. The reason you don't see me discussing CoD is because, unlike many others in here, I don't see the point of whining constantly about something that is in the process of being fixed.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

AoA: you are wrong. Bob2 does have online. Albeit the system is extremely poor, but it does work.
Not likely but no worries either way mate.. In that I was simply quoting the online reviews.

It does exactly what it says on the tin. Take a look at the A2A website if you like.
Are you sure your not confusing Rowan's original BoB with Shockwaves BoB II? Because looking at the A2A sites there is still no mention of BoB II being sold with online capabilities, i.e.

A2A simulations BoB (http://www.a2asimulations.com/bob/)

Maybe it is some hack/mod that was added later? Because Rowan did release the original BoB I code to the world prior to going out of business.. And that is the code Shockwave started with when they made BoB II. But as one of the quotes I provided stated, Shockwave decided to remove the online capabilities because they were unable to fix the bugs in the original Rowan BoB I code.. Which brings us back to that recourses thing.. They put all their focus in OFFLINE such that they were unable to fix the ONLINE aspects

[philip.ed]

Sorry, I should have been more specific. The A2A forum is the place to check out: http://a2asimulations.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=10

The website itself clearly states that the game is developed now by the dedicated freeware BDG group. And the multiplayer works exactly as it is talked about on the forums. It's not the focus of the game in anyway, but needless to say it exists. http://a2asimulations.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=22630

I understand why you feel the two are incomparable, but they are the only two aviation sims that focus on the BoB. With that in mind, it is a worthwhile assessment for offline players. Clearly for onliners, the introduction of CloD is brilliant, and many may have seen it as a progression from modded Il-2 online.

BoB2 was never developed as an online sim. It's aimed at a minority of simmers. That doesn't mean it can't be compared to CloD: the latter uses technology such that it could run with all of Bob2's offline features if it was developed enough (or, perhaps, if it was opened to community groups).

[ACE-OF-ACES]

The website itself clearly states that the game is developed now by the dedicated freeware BDG group.
Ah, as I expected..

A post developer mod and not part of the A2A product for sale. Thus all my orginal statments still stand

And this even highlights my statments..

That the focus was on OFFLINE such that it took them years after the inital release to include (mod/hack) ONLINE into the game.. And even after all that time and effort it is still 'funky' ONLINE play..

Which only shows how much effort (amout of resorses) is required to get ONLINE in at release time and done right..

Like CoD has done.

[fruitbat]

Which only shows how much effort (amout of resorses) is required to get ONLINE in at release time and done right..

Like CoD has done.

Up until this point i actually agreed with much of what you said in this thread, but that is comedy gold........

Trying yes, working on improving yes, done, lol.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Trying yes, working on improving yes, done, lol.
Don't confuse.. or limit the ONLINE statement to the topic of user interface (GUI) or mission types (COOP, DF) interface..

Which is what I 'belive' you are refering to? Yes?

Because when I say include ONLINE I mean all the stuff (math) that goes into syncing up the 3D world on each persons machine.. That is to say once your flying.. Until 1C came out with IL-2.. most if not all online flight sims had serious issues with 'warping'.. I know I konow you still see it from time to time in IL-2 and CoD.. and most of those that you do see are due to discos of players..

A good example of which I speak is the DCS flight sims.. If you have ever been sitting on the flight line and seen a Black Shark helo.. or F15 that was parked next to you suddenly WARP out of visual range.. That is what I am refering too.. And it happens quite often in DCS stuff.. That kind of warping use to be the 'norm' in online flight simming prior to 1C's IL-2.. I don't know what kind of net code 1C came up with.. but it is the best I have seen thus far for flight sims.. RoF is the 1st recent sim I have seen that even comes close

Long story short, not the interface you go threw to start flying.. There are issues with that in CoD that some don't like.. I am talking about the actul ONLINE flying aspect

[fruitbat]

While that is what i am mainly referring to, it IS an integral part of the whole online system, yes/no?

Its like a car, the engine under the hood can be 1000hp, but if you haven't the key, you'll be having no fun.....

That said i do get your point, But I still maintain that using the phrase 'done and done right' somewhat premature.

But i am patient.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

But i am patient.
As were the BoB II users..

One of the links I provided stated BoB II was not considered 'playable' untill after a year past the release date

Which is the case for most games these days.. Sadly the general public seems to forget how long it took some games to become what they became

[fruitbat]

As were the BoB II users..

One of the links I provided stated BoB II was not considered 'playable' untill after a year past the release date

Which is the case for most games these days.. Sadly the general public seems to forget how long it took some games to become what they became

Well, you can forget me as one of the BoB II users.

But you can add me to the il2 1946 users who is finally getting things fixed he's waited for, for 10 years, so i am well aware of how long it takes for games to mature.

Hence why i said i was patient, and fill my flying time with Il2 and RoF and DCS until CloD's ready for prime time, in my eyes, and not what other people say is fine.

RoF is a good example of this, for the first year and a half, i thought it stank, but its matured into something rather good, if you don't cut your nose of to spite your face like so many over its business model.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Hence why i said i was patient
Roger.. didn't mean to imply you were not! That is to say when I said 'general public' I was not thinking of you being in that catagory!

Sadly, for CoD, this CoD forum, and any future CoD products the 'general public' types are not capable of that level of patients

[ACE-OF-ACES]

RoF is a good example of this, for the first year and a half, i thought it stank, but its matured into something rather good
Agreed 100%

I could not even stand to play it until they fixxed the dot disapearing stuff a few patches back.. Now I think RoF has one of the finest graphics engines going.. On that note, I posted once or twice about the issue in the RoF forums some six months after release.. Some told me the 'fix' was to use the zoom.. Which was more of a work around than fix.. What I did NOT do is post there each and every week asking when it woudl be fixxed, or bashing the sim for it not being fixxed. I simply put the sim on the self for a year and check in from time to time.. Bought a few planes even though I didn't play it much (ie saw a good thing wanted to support it) than when the fixed the dot disapearing thing I played and play it quite often.. nash and sop and I even made a few cool videos that nash posted on his youtube site.. It is a very good sim imho

[philip.ed]

Ah, as I expected..

A post developer mod and not part of the A2A product for sale. Thus all my orginal statments still stand

And this even highlights my statments..

That the focus was on OFFLINE such that it took them years after the inital release to include (mod/hack) ONLINE into the game.. And even after all that time and effort it is still 'funky' ONLINE play..

Which only shows how much effort (amout of resorses) is required to get ONLINE in at release time and done right..

Like CoD has done.

It is not a MOD or a hack. The BDG team are unplayed, but in close contact with the A2A team who took BoB2 under their wing. It is an addition to the sim which is neither official nor unofficial.


But I don't see what relevence any of this has to do with comparing CloD's offline experience to BoB2. If Oleg and co had chosen to make CloD online only, then fair enough, but the fact is they haven't, and we were previously told that CloD's AI, comms system etc would be in a league of their own. Well they're not, sadly. BoB2, however, excels in these areas and has a campaign which has now only been equalled by ROF (albeit being buggy initally). As a simmer, I am happy to have a lot of choice, but I compare each sim together because they are all developed towards the same goal: realism.
The resourced used for offline play don't even impact on the offline experience. If the technology and engine BoB2 used was as efficient as Il-2's was, there is every reason to consider an online system being created as good as Il-2's. It just isn't capable of that.

What this does show, however, is that olf technology can be tuned and optimized to achieve something incredible. CloD is new technology! It is capable of achieving what BoB2 has for the offline user easily! I didn't expect CloD to actually achieve what Oleg said it would, but I KNOW that it can. And BoB2 (along with Il-2) is worthy comparison for what it should aim towards.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

it is an addition to the sim which is neither official nor unofficial.
lol!

[philip.ed]

By that I mean it is a beta; much like any of the BETA patches released for CloD. It is not official, and is in no way answerable to the product, but is produced from an official source.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

it is not official, and is in no way answerable to the product, but is produced from an official source.
lol!

[nearmiss]

By that I mean it is a beta; much like any of the BETA patches released for CloD. It is not official, and is in no way answerable to the product, but is produced from an official source.

Phillip don't sweat these guys. They aren't doing any virtual flying they are on the forums constantly ragging out the chit chat.

You are getting good experience and learning about air combat sims.

If you want to improve your chit chat skills hang on the forums and do your chit chat experimenting on some of these guys... they deserve it.

[IamNotDavid]

Phillip don't sweat these guys. They aren't doing any virtual flying they are on the forums constantly ragging out the chit chat.

You are getting good experience and learning about air combat sims.

If you want to improve your chit chat skills hang on the forums and do your chit chat experimenting on some of these guys... they deserve it.

What's your profile name on RoF?

[kendo65]

With regards to fairness, disagree 100%, but you are welcome to your opinion. As for me being defensive, Hardly, it is a simple case of you confusing 'defense' with me providing another point of view.. a different perspective.. or in this case the flip side of the coin that is BoB II to show it was not all that some would have us belive. I also went as far as to include links that show it took the makers of BoB II (Shockwave) OVER A YEAR to fix all the bugs such that it was a playable game.. To give the current crop of CoD gloom'n'doomers some 'prospective' on how all new games have issues at the start.. Even the BoB II that some hold up as the BENCH MARK of flight sims

You still seem to be under the misapprehension that BOB II was brought up to either denigrate COD, or for the sole reason of comparing COD unfavourably with another game. It wasn't. It was brought up only as an example of what the OP thought was a good standard of AI and campaign.

The sole criteria in that discussion was whether the AI in BOB II is any good.
Either it is or it isn't.

Details about how long it took BOB II to get to that point, whether the production process that created it was in-house or mod, or the exact proportion of developer effort directed at online compared to offline is irrelevant to the above point.

Those questions along with the 'fairness' question would be relevant if the discussion was about WHY COD's AI might be viewed as less devleoped than BOB's, or as a defense of the situation, but once again you are seeing attacks on COD where they don't exist and defending in your usual kneejerk manner. Your approach is the same here as it has been on other threads:

1. If you can't deny the opinion (BOB AI good) then broaden the debate so that you can criticise something ('yes, but they didn't have to worry about online')

2. Turn it into a 'rally to the flag' defense against the evil 'glass half empty' brigade.

3. Resort to some ridiculous caricature of other's points of view by resorting to stupidity such as: "Even the BoB II that some hold up as the BENCH MARK of flight sims"

[IamNotDavid]

You still seem to be under the misapprehension that BOB II was brought up to either denigrate COD, or for the sole reason of comparing COD unfavourably with another game. It wasn't. It was brought up only as an example of what the OP thought was a good standard of AI and campaign.


No, it wasn't. I said that we're not really in a position to complain about CoD when there really aren't any competitors. He brought up BoB2 as a competitor. I said, fine, go play BoB2. Do you see how that works? Complaining is a waste of time. Just go play the game you enjoy playing.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

You still seem to be under the misapprehension that BOB II was brought up to either denigrate COD, or for the sole reason of comparing COD unfavourably with another game. It wasn't.
Disagree 100%

[ACE-OF-ACES]

No, it wasn't. I said that we're not really in a position to complain about CoD when there really aren't any competitors. He brought up BoB2 as a competitor. I said, fine, go play BoB2. Do you see how that works? Complaining is a waste of time. Just go play the game you enjoy playing.Agree 100%

[philip.ed]

Disagree 100%

Well you are 100% wrong.

I brought BoB2 up to show that there were areas in CloD which meet stiff competition (if one wishes to use that word). Competition alludes to an idea that the two are competing with eachother: they are not. The point of the matter is to show that CLoD is no offline holy grail. I will play Bob2 whilst I wait for CloD to provide a better offline experience, but I will happily push the offline issues to the developers in order to hope for an improved experience.
If CloD ends up having the best AI, comms, campaign system, skin system etc in any aerial simulation it will be a win-win situation for an offline user like me. I can still fire up sims like Bob2 and enjoy them, and at the same time have the option to play a sim like CloD which is graphically brilliant (in most areas) and has an incredible DM system.

Kendo is 100% right. I don't understand the psychology you are using, Aces, to make me believe that I created this topic to bash CloD and simulataneously suggest that BoB2 is the benchmark of all flight-sims. That is so wrong.

For the record as well, Luthier himself disagrees that complaining is a waste of time. He said that, without complaints, Il-2 would never have gotten to where it was, and neither would CloD. I myself sent Oleg and Luthier pages of documents on RAF flight clothing (which don't seem to have been used to their full potential) to assist in the creation of the sim. Having Oleg contact me for this info stemmed from a complaint I made about the in-game pilots.

So that disproves both of you completely.

[addman]

You still seem to be under the misapprehension that BOB II was brought up to either denigrate COD, or for the sole reason of comparing COD unfavourably with another game. It wasn't. It was brought up only as an example of what the OP thought was a good standard of AI and campaign.

The sole criteria in that discussion was whether the AI in BOB II is any good.
Either it is or it isn't.

Details about how long it took BOB II to get to that point, whether the production process that created it was in-house or mod, or the exact proportion of developer effort directed at online compared to offline is irrelevant to the above point.

Those questions along with the 'fairness' question would be relevant if the discussion was about WHY COD's AI might be viewed as less devleoped than BOB's, or as a defense of the situation, but once again you are seeing attacks on COD where they don't exist and defending in your usual kneejerk manner. Your approach is the same here as it has been on other threads:

1. If you can't deny the opinion (BOB AI good) then broaden the debate so that you can criticise something ('yes, but they didn't have to worry about online')

2. Turn it into a 'rally to the flag' defense against the evil 'glass half empty' brigade.

3. Resort to some ridiculous caricature of other's points of view by resorting to stupidity such as: "Even the BoB II that some hold up as the BENCH MARK of flight sims"

Since this is a waste of space thread I'm just gonna waste one post on it, well formulated kendo65....:)aaand I'm out!

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Well you are 100% wrong.
That is your opinion and your welcome to it.. Just know that I and others don't agree with your assesment

[kendo65]

Sensible move Addman. I'm out too.

Like trying to nail jelly to the ceiling.

[kendo65]

That is your opinion and your welcome to it.. Just know that I and others don't agree with your assesment

Ok - I couldn't help myself...:mad:

Just wanted to point out Aces that with your last reply you are now claiming that you know better than Philip.ed what was going through his head when he posted about BOB II.

That's either deranged or just a little bit arrogant wouldn't you say?

Ok, now I'm out.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Ok - I couldn't help myself...:mad:

Just wanted to point out Aces that with your last reply you are now claiming that you know better than Philip.ed what was going through his head when he posted about BOB II.

That's either deranged or just a little bit arrogant wouldn't you say?
Yawn..

Ok, now I'm out.
Promise?

[JG52Uther]

Well looks like this thread is going nowhere, so...