Friday Update, January 27, 2012

[BlackSix]

It’s our pleasure to continue our weekly updates in 2012!

From now on our Friday updates will include both information on Cliffs of Dover (when we have something exciting to reveal) as well as updates on the state of our not-yet-announced sequel.

We’ve already shown you a few screenshots from our next project in our pre-holiday update. You can see it here (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=28769).


And now, the State of the Project address from project’s lead Ilya “Luthier” Shevchenko

We could have probably avoided a lot of bad blood if I had explained some basics earlier. So let’s take a step back and discuss the specifics of video game development as it exists today.

2012 is not 1999 or 2004. Hardware capabilities and community expectations grow at an exponential rate. In the golden early days of the series – over 10 years ago – we could have written an entire cool new feature in a week, rewritten a complex module in two, or created a new plane in a month. In those days we could offer you something new and exciting to look at every Friday!

Things are not the same today. A single plane model can take a year of work or more! Complex tasks such as changes to AI or flight model take many months of coding and testing. The industry reached this strange stage where the end result does not seem to match the amount of time that went into it. If you compare a late-year 1946 plane with a CoD aircraft, it’s hard to believe that one took a month and the other a year to make. Does it really look 12 times better?

If you drew a diagram of time spent on task vs perceived quality, the curve would be very, very sharp.

It is what it is. It takes a huge amount of time to rise above the bar set by the original Il-2. The illusion of time spent vs quality delivered affects not only the layman but us professional developers as well. We’ve underestimated the amount of time it could take to “do better” quite a few times. We could do it exactly like in Il-2 in a month. But we don’t want to do it like in IL-2. We want to do better. And to reach the next qualitative level you need to spend significantly more time. In some cases, a year instead of a month, or even worse.

Secondly, and I hope this part is obvious to most everyone, games are developed by teams of people with very different skills. They rarely intersect. For example, there are team members who are great at making 3D models of tanks. They can’t just switch over and make a cockpit one day. They’d need many months of retraining. And even more than that, a tank modeler can’t just come in one day and fix a memory leak in the network code. All he can really do is make great tank models regardless of what a network programmer or a map maker are doing.

I’m really hoping this will cut down on cries of “why do we need x when we still have the glaring problem of y!” Each team member does the thing he can do at the speed it can be done. “Hire more programmers” is not a solution either. If your plane can’t fly very fast, putting more pilots in the cockpit won’t do much for its top speed. Especially when your plane is a unique one-off model with controls and other systems quite unlike anything any pilot might have ever handled before.

So we address each issue at its own speed. Some bugs can be fixed very quickly, and they are. We can update a cockpit lever animation or fix a type in a matter of minutes. On the other hand, locating a memory leak can take many long months of dedicated work by some extremely qualified programmers. All bugs are not created equal.

So our general status report is very simple. Everyone is working very hard doing the same thing they were doing a month or a year ago. Graphical programmers are working on graphics. Network programmers are combing through the network code. Plane modelers are building 3D models of aircraft. No one stopped. Nothing was abandoned. On the contrary, the team continues to grow.

I also have to say that under these conditions reporting on intermediate progress is very hard. Say, we’ve measured FPS in the new graphics engine. The engine still has some problems, solving which will have a definite impact on FPS – whether positive or negative is impossible to say. However if we were to announce that in a mission X we’ve increased FPS by Y% on hardware Z, then regardless of the size of the WIP disclaimer, we’d be eating our words for years to come if they turned out to be too optimistic.

So we continue to work, quietly and privately.

The progress is a constant. Graphics are virtually complete. Almost all of the newly introduced bugs are squashed. There are lots of other improvements. The new project as well is advancing at a good pace.

I can’t say anything more than that however, this week like many other weeks. It’ll be ready when it’s ready. And as we all know, nothing good ever comes out of talking about it before it is ready.

PS And I’d like to point this out one more time. There is no conflict between the old and the new. We have one team that works on a single overall task, that is, improving the Il-2 series. Whether it is a new sound engine or a new graphics engine, we don’t make them for CoD or for the sequel. We make them for IL-2 Sturmovik.

(end of producer transmission)

We are also working on improving Russian and German localization with the help of the community.


And now let’s look into the future.

We are very proud to show off another flyable plane from the sequel, the famous Polikarpov I-16. It’s the mainstay of the Soviet air force in the early period of the war. It’s still a work in progress. We will reveal its cockpit at a later time.

Please tune in next week for screenshots of a damaged I-16 as well as something completely different!

Good hunting!

[BlackSix]

And more:

[Flanker35M]

S!

Thank you for the update! And that Rata looks great!

[NSU]

yes very nice :)

[JG52Krupi]

Thanks guys, great update.

[NaBkin]

Keep up the good work! Thanks!

[Skoshi Tiger]

Thanks for the update! It's good to see things as they are progressing!

It will be very interesting to see the winter landscape for the ski variant or the I-16!

[Pato Salvaje]

Thank You B6 and Luthier for the update!!
Good job with the I-16!!

Great update. Keep it coming!!

[Viking]

As we say here in Thailand.

Viking

[jayrc]

Looks great :grin:

[klem]

Thanks for the update and the explanations.
I suggest you lock the Thread at the first "I want it now" whine.

[Qpassa]

Memory leak...months? what a pity
Thanks

[5./JG27.Farber]

Excellant update. :-P

[csThor]

@ BlackSix

Is it already known which types of the I-16 will be there? I ask because (once again) the very rare ShVAk-armed I-16 is shown before the much more representative versions with the ShKAs as wing armament (Type 18 and Type 24).

[_79_dev]

Thanks ...

[SNAFU]

Thank you, Sir! ;)

... just seeing the picture I expected csThor to jump on that immediatly, but hey I was wrong, it took you 20 minutes... you are getting old, csThor... ;) ;)

@ BlackSix

Is it already known which types of the I-16 will be there? I ask because (once again) the very rare ShVAk-armed I-16 is shown before the much more representative versions with the ShKAs as wing armament (Type 18 and Type 24).

[Aer9o]

...depresing!...cosidering 6yrs of development! and now we have to wait quietly for months for a beta patch to be released...for us to do the testing!!!
The question is straight forwarard : why this title has been released if you say that it takes so long now days to deliver a good and finished product!
Please also look at other people in the industry, how they deliver, at what pace and also how they bond and interact with their fan base! :rolleyes:

[BlackSix]

@ BlackSix

Is it already known which types of the I-16 will be there? I ask because (once again) the very rare ShVAk-armed I-16 is shown before the much more representative versions with the ShKAs as wing armament (Type 18 and Type 24).

The early plans were Type 24 and Type 28. I do not know if have time to do both, or add another modification.

[garengarch]

thanks for the updates

[Sutts]

Great update, thanks guys.

This product has such huge potential. Please don't let the negativity of a few get you down. Even with the bugs I'm enjoing the experience. The feeling of flight and height is like no other sim. I can be patient because I can see where you're heading and I like it. Good things can take a while to blossom.....

[Gravy]

I have only just purchased the game but cannot play due to the constant crashing to desktop, i assume from what I have read on here that this is the memory leak that Luthier is reffering to. I didn't pay a lot for the game and i knew there were problems but to wait an indefinate amount of time for a fix seems very harsh. I guess I will just have to leave it on the shelf. Thanks for the update anyhow.

[csThor]

The early plans were Type 24 and Type 28. I do not know if have time to do both, or add another modification.

Actually the Type 24 (with ShKAS as wing armament) would be the most representative ... ;)

@ SNAFU - :-P Some people gotta work. And I'm one of them. :cool:

[Aer9o]

I have the feeling Tvrdi that at the time it was release the product or shelve it completely....and I know which option I prefer. This is a small niche and 1c have dedication and passion for the subject we all love. They've shown in the past what they're capable of. Let's give them a chance to deliver another 10 years of greatness.

...how about now? as I do not know I will be here in 10yrs mate!

[SNAFU]

RoF planes are simple by design, less detailed and the modell is hardly to compare with the modells used in CloD, so this comparison is a little off... and we do not even consider the system and the data... ;)

Huh, I am doing Robteks job... well, it`s Friday... ;)

@csThor:
Jaja, der schnöde Mammon... ;) ... also zurück an die Arbeit *peitsch*, soviele Postings hole ich ja sonst nie ein...

[Sutts]

I have only just purchased the game but cannot play due to the constant crashing to desktop, i assume from what I have read on here that this is the memory leak that Luthier is reffering to. I didn't pay a lot for the game and i knew there were problems but to wait an indefinate amount of time for a fix seems very harsh. I guess I will just have to leave it on the shelf. Thanks for the update anyhow.


Mine crashes to desktop regularly too but I'm happy to put up with it for now. Probably my own fault for running XP anyway. Just turn the details down to a level that makes it playable and simply enjoy flying and learning the systems. Plenty of time for takeoff and landing practice and a spot of cross country navigation before the next patch.;)

[Luftrofl]

Posted 10-17-2011

3. Performance. We are in final stages of testing a thorough overhaul of the game’s graphic engine. It won’t look any different but it will be much more streamlined. It’s too early to say what the FPS increase will be in the final version, but it shouldn’t be less than 50%.

Supposedly in final testing over 3 months ago yet still not released. Not even an ETA.

You must be joking.

Sorry for not being appreciative and all that. I was hoping to have stable multiplayer and no stuttering by now.

This is NINE MONTHS since release after all...

[Bewolf]

...how about now? as I do not know I will be here in 10yrs mate!

No problem, just send them a magic wand and everything will be fine =)

Great update! Rata brings back memories, soooo looking forward to that one.

[VO101_Tom]

It’s our pleasure to continue our weekly updates in 2012!

Hi BlackSix. Thank you for the information.
May i ask a pure technical question? What is the polygon-count of the sequel's planes? Compared to the CloD a/c engine models, the cylindrical and the rounded parts seem to be simpler. I have no problem with it, looks really good! I'm just curious how many polygon is made up of a fighter aircraft, for example? Clod and BoM?

[Sternjaeger II]

With all due respect, IMHO this again is evidence of poor managing and working on an unstable platform.

A year to develop a plane? Months to squash a memory leak? There must be ways around it man, because others deliver in less time, so whatever you're doing you're not doing it right. It doesn't even take a year to build the real thing, how on earth it can take a year to develop one for a sim, no matter how accurate it is?

For what my professional experience is worth, just like in a factory you need to optimise standards and possibly change your chain of production, there are loads of consultants out there that can help you assess your situation and help you improve productivity.

There's nothing embarrassing in it Luthier, it's often a case of programmers getting together and sometimes good will and some experience doesn't mean one can actually handle an evolving and expanding venture like yours.

As you said, do it for the sake of the IL-2 series, you REALLY need to give a thought into the reassessment of your production methods.


Other than that, great job on the I-16, can't wait to see the FWs and Bfs!

[Sutts]

Posted 10-17-2011

3. Performance. We are in final stages of testing a thorough overhaul of the game’s graphic engine. It won’t look any different but it will be much more streamlined. It’s too early to say what the FPS increase will be in the final version, but it shouldn’t be less than 50%.

Supposedly in final testing over 3 months ago yet still not released. Not even an ETA.

You must be joking.

Sorry for not being appreciative and all that. I was hoping to have stable multiplayer and no stuttering by now.

It's only been NINE MONTHS since release...


If you still have stuttering then you're running on too high detail settings or you have under 1GB of VRAM. I have completely smooth play and my card is ancient.....GeForce GTS 250 1GB.

[Aer9o]

No problem, just send them a magic wand and everything will be fine =)

Great update! Rata brings back memories, soooo looking forward to that one.

...they have had many years at their disposal to do magic!!!...sorry to dissagree!;)

[Luftrofl]

If you still have stuttering then you're running on too high detail settings or you have under 1GB of VRAM. I have completely smooth play and my card is ancient.....GeForce GTS 250 1GB.

I'm using a 560ti. Spends most of its time running Battlefield 3 maxed out just fine. Scores at or above expected values for all the benchmarks I have run on it.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

In other news, guess I will check back in a few months. The bar is set so low at this point nearly anything out of these guys is an unexpected surprise.

[BlackSix]

Actually the Type 24 (with ShKAS as wing armament) would be the most representative ... ;)

Yes, I know. We will try)

Hi BlackSix. Thank you for the information.
May i ask a pure technical question? What is the polygon-count of the sequel's planes? Compared to the CloD a/c engine models, the cylindrical and the rounded parts seem to be simpler. I have no problem with it, looks really good! I'm just curious how many polygon is made up of a fighter aircraft, for example? Clod and BoM?

Hi!
Well, I'll ask, but I can not do it before Tuesday. Please remind me about it through private messages.

[kendo65]

Thanks Blacksix and Luthier for the update.

A word to those finding fault, I'm not normally that bothered about people expressing their opinions, but after what is a very decent update with an in-depth report from Luthier on the difficulties they are encountering I'm amazed to find people throwing it back in his face. All you armchair software development experts who think you personally know better...! Take a look at yourselves.

[Aer9o]

"So we continue to work, quietly and privately."

Here is a constructive proposal : put on the table all that you have so far and let people download and try your alpha or beta and get the feedback, that will speed up development!... It has been done before by other developers!

[Gravy]

Whats difficult to understand is that from what I have read there was no memory leak before the last patch, is that correct? If so how hard can it be in finding out what caused the problem, surely you just go back and add the coding bit by bit and test it until you discover what is causing the problem, assuming you have someone working on it constantly it should be easily fixed until the next patch is ready. What the game needs now is people playing it and being positive, I played Il2-FB last night and there were 300 people in hyperlobby and only 26 in Cliffs of Dover servers. Get the game working and this will change dramatically, surely that makes good business sense.

[Aer9o]

Thanks Blacksix and Luthier for the update.

A word to those finding fault, I'm not normally that bothered about people expressing their opinions, but after what is a very decent update with an in-depth report from Luthier on the difficulties they are encountering I'm amazed to find people throwing it back in his face. All you armchair software development experts who think you personally know better...! Take a look at yourselves.

...some of us purchased games before!...may I suggest you have a look at what else its available in the industry and how it is delivered!

[JG52Krupi]

Hi!
Well, I'll ask, but I can not do it before Tuesday. Please remind me about it through private messages.

Could you also ask what model file type and software they use, thanks

[JG52Krupi]

Clearly a lot of trolls who have no idea about CAD, open yours eyes and realise RoF has nothing on CoD models... Why you ask well just look at a ww1 aircraft and compare it to a ww2 aircraft there is simply much much more to be modelled.. But hey ignorance is supposed to be bliss right so just carry on trolling.

[Sutts]

I'm using a 560ti. Spends most of its time running Battlefield 3 maxed out just fine. Scores at or above expected values for all the benchmarks I have run on it.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

In other news, guess I will check back in a few months. The bar is set so low at this point nearly anything out of these guys is an unexpected surprise.



Well maybe I don't, but if I can run this thing smoothly using XP with only 2GB of memory and an ancient card then there must be something significantly wrong with your system OR you're expecting too much in terms of detail settings.

Just because you can run battlefield on full doesn't mean you can do the same with CloD in it's current unoptimised state. The product is very resource hungry at present but you can play it smoothly if you reduce resolution and detail settings.

[BlackSix]

Could you also ask what model file type and software they use, thanks

We now turn to 3D Max 2012 with older versions.

[JG52Krupi]

Krupi for GOd sake your working for 1C now? hehe hillarious.....they should hire you

No I am a design engineer and use CAD and therefore can appreciate the length of time it takes to generate a highly detailed model.

Anyone recognise the usual rotten apples!!

[SlipBall]

Thank's for the update!...sequel may have been started on too soon IMHO...cart before the wheel

[lothar29]

JG52Krupi

There is no excuse, all companies of simulation are in 2012 so it more or less working under the same demand and above Clifs of Dover is you have cut levels graphic...


Maybe according to you, ROF has not comparison, but also ED with DCS - A10c...

[jimbop]

Thanks for the update. I was shooting down a 110 on ATAG when I heard about the update on teamspeak - great fun and a nice explosion too.

Don't think that the loudest speak for the majority. Looking forward to the patch and the sequel.

[JG52Krupi]

We now turn to 3D Max 2012 with older versions.

Thanks

[JG52Krupi]

Also if CoD is so crap why are the RoF and CoD multiplayer numbers so comparable both game have around 50 ppl playing them.. Now I can understand why CoD has low numbers but then surely if RoF is soo much better it should have more ppl online...

[Pluto]

... nice Rata !
:)

[Luno13]

Thanks for the update BlackSix and Ilya!

All the best, and please don't be discouraged by the droves of whiners ;)

[Sternjaeger II]

Where was a year mentioned? Ah yes nowhere they said a few months.

Sorry mods please remove my posts, I shouldn't get wound up by the usual brainless dorks that have no clue

man, did you actually read the first post? :confused:

Things are not the same today. A single plane model can take a year of work or more! Complex tasks such as changes to AI or flight model take many months of coding and testing. The industry reached this strange stage where the end result does not seem to match the amount of time that went into it. If you compare a late-year 1946 plane with a CoD aircraft, it’s hard to believe that one took a month and the other a year to make. Does it really look 12 times better?

If you drew a diagram of time spent on task vs perceived quality, the curve would be very, very sharp.

It is what it is. It takes a huge amount of time to rise above the bar set by the original Il-2. The illusion of time spent vs quality delivered affects not only the layman but us professional developers as well. We’ve underestimated the amount of time it could take to “do better” quite a few times. We could do it exactly like in Il-2 in a month. But we don’t want to do it like in IL-2. We want to do better. And to reach the next qualitative level you need to spend significantly more time. In some cases, a year instead of a month, or even worse.

[Heliocon]

I hate being right.

Also like others mentioned, 1 year for a plane? Seriously? Thats sad, the graphical modeling of a planes exterior should only take a few days, a week at most. Adding details and optimizing the model another week, then another for texturing; so about a month total? In Maya 7.5 it took me two weeks to model, texture and animate (although it was limited) a abrahms on my first time.
Sounds like the development team is still suffering from a lack of efficiency/streamlining/leadership. Same old story, same old excuses.

Also ROF has airframe failure due to Gs and such, where is that in CLOD?

Edit: also game stutters when close to enemy aircraft in combat on my rig, dust on ground during takeoff and mirror cause large multi second stutters too!

[335th_GRAthos]

Well, I admit this is a better communication "package" compared to the last one I gave you my feedback upon (the infamous "balalaika" youtube video...).

Still, you are becoming masters in disguise... (I avoid using the term masters of deception out of politness).
I had to read the text twice to understand. Worthy of SunZu's teachings, brilliantly worded, it earns my respect!
Cudos to your effort!

Now that I have given you credit for the worthwhile effort, please allow me to tell you some things which I appreciated less:
Pretty pictures - little content.
You left us with a memory leak that grows to 4Gb RAM before crashing, obliging us to restart the game after every flight, for weeks now.
Careful reading of your statements makes me deduct that you have not being able to trace the cause of the memory leak much less provide a fix for it.
More concerning, no comment any more about the complete graphics model overhaul (which was the cause for not creating an intermediary patch).
Last but not least, no comments on the current flight model bugs in terms of performance of existing airplanes (e.g. SpitII) and funtionality of airplanes (e.g. JU-88 not working gyros).
Not posting a single date/ timeframe for completion of tasks (any task!) makes me speechless.

No need to worry gentlemen, I will buy your next sequel, and the one after that.

What frustrates me is that I am 46years old, have four university degrees (= my brain is working) but sometimes I feel I am reading communication destined to 12 year olds... :(

~S~

[JG52Krupi]

yes 2 weeks to model a aircraft, a few months to model the structure, engine, internals and cockpit etc

[Sutts]

..one other thing ...at least Oleg it the good old days had the courtesy to reply himself directly to us on all developments, updates etc!:!:

Oh, give me a break. Blacksix is our community liaison now. Why shouldn't he handle it? You guys are unbelievable, you really are.

[csThor]

Without any comment on the timeframe of modelling:

WW1 types are utterly primitive compared to their WW2 counterparts. CEM in WW2 is a totally different beast than in WW1. All those technological gadgets of WW2 (i.e. Radar, radio systems, radio beam systems etc) just weren' there in WW1. As such the amount of systems to be modeled is infinitely greater in a WW2 crate. Some people should take that into consideration before they let out the warcries and start besieging the 1C office complex. ;)

[jimbop]

BlackSix, will Luthier provide answers for the last set of questions? It has been a few weeks.

[Sammi79]

Thank you Black Six, Luthier, and everyone at 1C.

For a very informative update. It is a unfortunate (but necessary) to have to explain why things take as long as they do. It is also unfortunate that even when presented with a reasonable explanation, certain people will simply deny it.

Kudos for maintaining communications under these unfortunate conditions.

That I-16 looks amazing, almost as complex as the real warbird. I have 3Dmax 2010 but in 2 years have yet to learn how to use it for more than making small edits to pre-existing models.

To all those folks who believe they know better - stop comparing apples to oranges and put your money where your mouth is; I shall wait patiently for your offering upon the altar of cutting edge simulation software.

Regards, Sam.

[McHilt]

A while since I've been here. That I-16 takes me back to my IL2 days, looks good and makes me wanna jump in right away. Hope to play COD and sequel one time when I have enough bucks again (hard work, no profits).
Reading this forum: nothing has changed as to flaming the devs... sad.

Anyway Blacksix and Luthier and team: Thanks and keep it going, I admire your work!

[mungee]

Thanks for the update!

I understand 100% what you are trying to tell us!

[Ataros]

did they say that?

The link does not work any more but I have quotes from that thread here http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=382661&postcount=1131

Jason says that all the malcontents and whiners did too much damage to their project. And I know that they moderate their forums much more strictly than 1C.

[Sternjaeger II]

The link does not work any more but I have quotes from that thread here http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=382661&postcount=1131

Jason says that all the malcontents and whiners did too much damage to their project. And I know that they moderate their forums much more strictly than 1C.

yeah but then again that's nothing new. You will always have whiners, you need to sell to generate income and finance R&D. I mean, guys, these are the basics of business.

At least they're working on a development and delivery format which is efficient and steadily releasing updates and new planes. Their formula works, in a sector that it's even more niche than this one.

[pupo162]

The link does not work any more but I have quotes from that thread here http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=382661&postcount=1131

Jason says that all the malcontents and whiners did too much damage to their project. And I know that they moderate their forums much more strictly than 1C.

"
@mods & all
Let's make sure Luthier or his successor does not have to post the same 3 messages here in 2013. This is our responsibility to stop usual local saboteurs. ¡No pasarán!"

using a "¡No pasarán!" whilst asking mods for a better done censure on the state of the game its hilarious.


regarding ROF, i feel sorry for the guys. i have bought 10 euros of ROF stuff this sale, very good stuff. but their selling method is just plain bad. i would have bought more and sooner if they sole it in a dvd as everyone else.

[tumu]

thx for update.

We want all photos you can post! hahahahhahahahah.

nice MOSCA whit big cannons!

thx

[Drum_tastic]

My humble opinion is, regardless of whether some in the community like the situation or not, we have to take on board what the devs are telling us and just let them get on with it, they are the ones in control. Why worry about something that we, as punters, cannot control.

I have to admit I am very disappointed with Clod, I spent £50 on something that I never play, because ultimately it is not in a playable condition yet.

However, I do have faith that the team are doing their best to try and fix it, as surely this is in their interests too.
When they have been able to get it running as is should run I will be back to hopefully play a sim I have been waiting for years to be born!

Have a good weekend all.

[bongodriver]

To be fair its not really the update we wanted is it, Ok its a WIP shot of a plane from BOM, but the update for Cliff Of dover looks very bleak which is after all why we are all here. The update says to me that they have no idea when they are going to be able to fix the game that they released some 10 months ago, its ready whens its ready is not very encouraging im my opinion. But there is other stuff to do its just dissappointing thats all.

I don't believe the devs are going to abandon COD if they want to sell a sequel, simple logic, they have to have COD working because it's going to be the engine that runs the sequel.

[Sternjaeger II]

it seems whatever Luthier does he's damned, people have been whining for updates, they get them and immediately use the opportunity do do more whining......

bongo, when I read that it takes a year or more to develop one plane, I just can't think of Maddox Games as an efficient team, sorry.

Again, I'm not questioning the skills of the people involved, I'm wondering if you realise that once you take out of the equation all the things that might affect such a slow progress, the only two options left are improper resource managing and still working on an unstable game coding.

[bongodriver]

bongo, when I read that it takes a year or more to develop one plane, I just can't think of Maddox Games as an efficient team, sorry.

Again, I'm not questioning the skills of the people involved, I'm wondering if you realise that once you take out of the equation all the things that might affect such a slow progress, the only two options left are improper resource managing and still working on an unstable game coding.

and the whinging helps how? other than making some very immature people feel better.

[Feathered_IV]

Also if CoD is so crap why are the RoF and CoD multiplayer numbers so comparable both game have around 50 ppl playing them.. Now I can understand why CoD has low numbers but then surely if RoF is soo much better it should have more ppl online...


Rof's single player experience is outstanding.

[JG52Krupi]

and the whinging helps how? other than making some very immature people feel better.

+1 watch out bongo in a min he's going to take a stab at you for being British and saying that bob was the most important battle of ww2 :rolleyes: even though you never did

[JG52Krupi]

Rof's single player experience is outstanding.

Agreed, head and shoulders above cod

[Gravy]

I don't believe the devs are going to abandon COD if they want to sell a sequel, simple logic, they have to have COD working because it's going to be the engine that runs the sequel.

No I dont believe that they are going to abandon the game either, but surely they owe it to their fans to throw every resource into fixing a game that most of you here purchased 10 months ago, reading between the lines the game will most likely not be fixed a year after release which isn't good for the fans or for the comapany.

[bongodriver]

+1 watch out bongo in a min he's going to take a stab at you for being British and saying that bob was the most important battle of ww2 :rolleyes: even though you never did

Yes I know.....treading on eggshells.

[bongodriver]

No I dont believe that they are going to abandon the game either, but surely they owe it to their fans to throw every resource into fixing a game that most of you here purchased 10 months ago, reading between the lines the game will most likely not be fixed a year after release which isn't good for the fans or for the comapany.

I'm not for a minute going to say the situation is 'ideal', were all in the same boat (even the fanbois), it's just the undertone of the whining is blatantly anti 1C COD and the horse it rode in on.

[Sutts]

A very good observation, which seems to have sadly been overlooked by the more enthusiastic fans on this forum. Because if true, Cliffs of dover would of taken over 10 years to get it to this part, and as we already know they didn't start until 2007.


If it's a development man year then it woudn't take 10 years. I'm sure 1c have more than one guy modelling planes.

These aircraft are complex and for many the blueprints no longer exist. If you want to make an accurate sim (which 1c do) then you could find yourself researching and gathering information on structure, systems and performance for much of that year. Then there's all the problems with getting the flight model to accurately reflect what your research is telling you and so on.....

When you throw in teething problems with the underlying engine too then I can quite easily see how it takes a man year for SOME aircraft - especially the larger multi-engined German types that are not particularly well documented.

I challenge you to find complete blueprints - including internal structure - for types such as the 110. Most of that stuff was destroyed when the war ended. If you don't want to just make stuff up then you have to undertake lengthy research.

[Ataros]

something that I never play, because ultimately it is not in a playable condition yet.

You and other complainers must have a different game version than this guy has. This is real online gameplay footage on ATAG server that proves that the game is in a playable condition with recent patches installed via Steam (unless you have a pirated version).
http://www.youtube.com/user/Semashko27/videos
If someone states the opposite please proved a proof as solid and evident as this one.

However I think the devs deserve criticism because they did not implement an issue tracking system yet as discussed here http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=24106
BlackSix, could you please ask Ilya if he can talk to 1cpublishing.eu admins to install such a system on this site and provide forum users rights to report and vote for bugs, issues and proposals there. Redmine (http://www.redmine.org/) and Bugzilla (http://www.bugzilla.org/) have voting capabilities and are free IIRC. This system will make life much easier for Ilya on the one hand and will prevent forgetting about not working features like COOPs on the other hand.

PS. Those who experience online launcher crash please try this solution http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=384729&postcount=124

[Bewolf]

You and other complainers must have a different game version than this guy has. This is real online gameplay footage on ATAG server that proves that the game is in a playable condition with recent patches installed via Steam (unless you have a pirated version).
http://www.youtube.com/user/Semashko27/videos
If someone states the opposite please proved a proof as solid and evident as this one.

However I think the devs deserve criticism because they did not implement an issue tracking system yet as discussed here http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=24106
BlackSix, could you please ask Ilya if he can talk to 1cpublishing.eu admins to install such a system on this site and provide forum users rights to report and vote for bugs, issues and proposals there. Redmine (http://www.redmine.org/) and Bugzilla (http://www.bugzilla.org/) have voting capabilities and are free IIRC. This system will make life much easier for Ilya on the one hand and will prevent forgetting about not working features like COOPs on the other hand.

PS. Those who experience online launcher crash please try this solution http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=384729&postcount=124

There currently is one major problem. That is the memory leak causing the launcher crashes. A quick fix for that would be highly desireable, as it makes formation flying with friends a choire.

That aside, the rest of the folks whining here are like a broken record. For months the same and the same and the same, spamming the forums. It's tiresome.

[csThor]

Gameplay on ATAG does not show the whole picture, quite the contrary. Apart from the CTD issues the engine currently neither allows for the amount of AI necessary for serious historical wargaming as opposed to the fighter gangbang that CloD is limited to ATM (judging by the vids available) nor do the lack of documentation and/or system modelling bugs with certain aircraft (i.e. Ju 88 gyro) and FM issues (across the whole scale) help matters. And don't get me started on offline ... it just isn't there.

[Gravy]

[QUOTE=Bewolf;385062]There currently is one major problem. That is the memory leak causing the launcher crashes. A quick fix for that would be highly desireable, as it makes formation flying with friends a choire.
QUOTE]

+1 fix the memory leak first, forget eveything else, get people playing your game without them you have nothing.

[Ataros]

There currently is one major problem. That is the memory leak causing the launcher crashes. A quick fix for that would be highly desireable, as it makes formation flying with friends a choire.

Please try the .bat file I link to. It clears the cache folder and starts CloD. sukhoi.ru guys also restart game after each flight which prevents launcher crash for 1-1.5 hours. Enough for a good coop :)

A agree though that we badly needed a hotfix for this from the devs already last autumn. Similar to absence of sound online which we suffered in summer for several months. Absence of these 2 hotfixes reduced the user-base dramatically imo which is very bad for BoM sales and future of the series.

[el0375]

Thanks to all of you! great update

[csThor]

Problem is, and I am quite certain few people have realized that, there is no way for a quick fix as the gfx engine is the root cause and only the new engine will fix it. This is the crux ... and no amount of (justified) indignation will make it go away quicker.

[Bewolf]

Please try the .bat file I link to. It clears the cache folder and starts CloD. sukhoi.ru guys also restart game after each flight which prevents launcher crash for 1-1.5 hours. Enough for a good coop :)

I already do that and I appreciate your support in this, Ataros. Neverthless that is a problem that imho needs to be tackled soon, because you never really know when it hits you and you can set up a great flight, circle over the airfield, gather up, fly to target and then all of a sudden the game is gone. With the rest of the issues I can happily live until the patch comes, whenever that is.

[csThor]

So fix it. Take everybody off the "sequel" until this is done.

You are aware that taking 3D modellers off the sequel will achieve nothing for coding fixes? Gosh, people, justified indignation is one thing but putting on blinders is another ... :roll:

[Sutts]

More concerning, no comment any more about the complete graphics model overhaul (which was the cause for not creating an intermediary patch).
~S~

Luthier did address the graphics overhaul.....

"Graphics are virtually complete. Almost all of the newly introduced bugs are squashed. There are lots of other improvements."

"The engine still has some problems".


Looks promising to me.

[Ataros]

Why don't you post the link where we can get our money back, hmm?

UBIsoft is the international publisher. Please contact them @ ubi.com
This site belongs to 1C which is a publisher for Russia only. MG/Softclub are developers only, they are not involved in sales. They are paid by publishers only and are supposed to report to publishers only.

[Bewolf]

So fix it. Take everybody off the "sequel" until this is done.




Spoken like someone who has my $50 and I have your unfinished game.

And you need to learn some manners when addressing customers of many years standing.

Why don't you post the link where we can get our money back, hmm?

Just take your game and throw it into a bin and file it under "lesson learned". I paid 70€ for my special edition. Am I happy? No, for sure not.
Am I a destructive entitlement junkie who had to register on this forum under a different alias just to put my pile of human digestion constantly highjacking threads here? Neither.

If Luthier and team require another year to get this game going, then so be it. I will then treat it as if it was only released by then and treat the current sitiuation like participating in an open beta. That is something I can live with it. If you can't, sell your copy and leave.

[bongodriver]

Just take your game and throw it into a bin and file it under "lesson learned". I paid 70€ for my special edition. Am I happy? No, for sure not.
Am I a destructive entitlement junkie that had to regisiter on this forum under a diferent alias just to put my pile of human digestion constantly highjacking threads here? Neither.

If Luthier and team require another year to get this game going, then so be it. I will then treat it as if it was only released by then and treat the current sitiuation like participating in an open beta. That is something I can live with it. If you can't, sell your copy and leave.

Beautifully said....

[VO101_Tom]

bongo, when I read that it takes a year or more to develop one plane, I just can't think of Maddox Games as an efficient team, sorry.

Again, I'm not questioning the skills of the people involved, I'm wondering if you realise that once you take out of the equation all the things that might affect such a slow progress, the only two options left are improper resource managing and still working on an unstable game coding.

At first read, the "one year work-hour" seems a lot for me too, but do not forget that the aircraft making not only for modeling. It should also be programmed to operate, which I think is much more difficult task. Each (e-a-c-h!) on-board system to understand and programming it's intact and damaged functioning. If they interact, its more complicated. This is a huge job. Especially the bomber aircrafts. I do not know the ratios, but be sure that the modeling in less time..

I agree with that SNAFU and Krupi, compared to the ROF the 3D complexity, and the CEM far better in clod (It is also true that there are flaws, no question). But IMHO the ROF CEM, FM, DM and graphic engine somewhere between the Il-2UP and Clod (yes, i had that games too)...

[Ataros]

Am I a destructive entitlement junkie that had to regisiter on this forum under a diferent alias just to put my pile of human digestion constantly highjacking threads here? Neither.

Yea, sometimes they are coming back to do more damage. I am sure the mods will take care of them.

[Sutts]

I'm not sure some of you understand that there is only one IL2 engine - there's no such thing as working on the CloD engine or working on the BoM engine.

Fix the engine and both products immediately benefit as they both use it. That's why I have no issue at all with them working on both in tandem. Good things will spill over into CloD as development of BoM progresses.

[bongodriver]

people can build a plastic model in an hour, but to do a nice job of it will take considerably longer, same goes for 3d modelling.

[VO101_Tom]

I'm not sure some of you understand that there is only one IL2 engine - there's no such thing as working on the CloD engine or working on the BoM engine.

Fix the engine and both products immediately benefit as they both use it. That's why I have no issue at all with them working on both in tandem. Good things will spill over into CloD as development of BoM progresses.

Yes, it's neccessary to maintain the compatibility. Any other "news from sukhoi" just a speculation, and hysteria... :rolleyes:

[J.Reb]

Just take your game and throw it into a bin and file it under "lesson learned". I paid 70€ for my special edition. Am I happy? No, for sure not.
Am I a destructive entitlement junkie that had to regisiter on this forum under a diferent alias just to put my pile of human digestion constantly highjacking threads here? Neither.

You are referring to me? This has been my name for 12 years, ask anyone in HL. I use no aliases.

As far as highjacking a thread, I'm not exactly sure what that is. I was merely responding to some dingbat who was beating the drum for a new sequel when I have not yet received the working game I paid for. The same gent tried to tantalize me with "something exciting to reveal" about CoD, which I took to be in poor taste considering.


If Luthier and team require another year to get this game going, then so be it. I will then treat it as if it was only released by then and treat the current sitiuation like participating in an open beta. That is something I can live with it. If you can't, sell your copy or contact UBI for a refund and leave.

How you would view it is irrelevant. I will not be happy until the game performs as it should. If that takes another year, perhaps they need more qualified personnel or management. 2013-2006=7 years minimum they have been working on it, with an interim unsuccessful release after 6 years. It sure seems they have been floundering for a long time.

You say I should leave? What would you do then for constructive criticism? Not to mention reminders of your poor manners.

[priller26]

Thanks Luthier and Black6 for the update. Things seem to be progressing in a positive fashion which is very exciting! Patience is a virtue, and I have no problem waiting for the new releases/updates. As with all things, it will be ready when its ready, and waiting longer for what will be years of fun flying is worth it.

[Sternjaeger II]

At first read, the "one year work-hour" seems a lot for me too, but do not forget that the aircraft making not only for modeling. It should also be programmed to operate, which I think is much more difficult task. Each (e-a-c-h!) on-board system to understand and programming it's intact and damaged functioning. If they interact, its more complicated. This is a huge job. Especially the bomber aircrafts. I do not know the ratios, but be sure that the modeling in less time..

I agree with that SNAFU and Krupi, compared to the ROF the 3D complexity, and the CEM far better in clod (It is also true that there are flaws, no question). But IMHO the ROF CEM, FM, DM and graphic engine somewhere between the Il-2UP and Clod (yes, i had that games too)...

it just doesn't add up. Look, I am no expert in the creation of 3d models or FMs, but from what I've learned after all these years, I would structure the development process in this way:

phase 1: 1 team (1 or 2 3d artists and a skinner) for 3d model production (2 if flyable)
phase 2: 1 team (2 coders) for implementation into model

Phase 1:
1) you choose the plane to implement. 1 week
2) you gather material on it according to the agreed standards: manuals, pictures, blueprints, translations (we're not in the '90s, there's a HUGE community out there with LOADS of information readily available) 2 to 3 weeks.
(Research work can be done by everybody according to availability and collated in a shared folder subdivided into sections)
3) in the meantime 3d model design starts:

3d internal and external body, LODs and DM. 4 weeks for a single engine/6 weeks for a multi-engine.

While this is going on, the skin artist works on the texturing in liaison with the 3d modellers. ongoing with 3d model.

3d model is completed, checked for bugs (possibly by another team) and passed to Phase 2. 1 week

Phase 2:

creation of FMs and DMs (which can happen whilst the other team is working on the 3d model) and implementation into game engine. 2 months

Testing of 3d model and FM. Note that the FM can be initially tested on a 3d mock-up to optimise times. 1 to 2 months

Beta testing 1 week

Final fixes 2 weeks

Now again pardon my lack of competence, but 6 months seem more than enough for the creation of one plane, let's not forget these guys are not doing it in their spare time, but they're steadily working on it (often on weekends apparently!) provided work is happening according to a tidy schedule without interruptions or reassignments to other duties.

[SG1_Lud]

it seems whatever Luthier does he's damned, people have been whining for updates, they get them and immediately use the opportunity do do more whining......

This thread in a nutshell. :rolleyes:


Thank you B6 for the update. Seems promising.

[Bewolf]

How you would view it is irrelevant. I will not be happy until the game performs as it should. If that takes another year, perhaps they need more qualified personnel or management. 2013-2006=7 years minimum they have been working on it, with an interim unsuccessful release after 6 years. It sure seems they have been floundering for a long time.

You say I should leave? What would you do then for constructive criticism? Not to mention reminders of your poor manners.

Imagine, 5 billion people on this planet are unhappy over their living conditions. What makes you stand out to make ppl notice you or take you serious?

More qualified personal or management = €€€. I am sure they will appreciate your donations.

[Aer9o]

Oleg is gone....get over it...

sadly...have to!:(

[J.Reb]

Imagine, 5 billion people on this planet are unhappy over their living conditions. What makes you stand out to make ppl notice you or take you serious?

Clear your head and try again, lol.


More qualified personal or management = €€€. I am sure they will appreciate your donations.

Exactly the reason they should not be working on a "sequel".

[Buster_Dee]

I have an older PC (E8500 dually with GTX480 and 8G RAM). I have and like both titles (CLOD and ROF). I'll admit that I'm an eye-candy junky, and both are beautiful to me. The thing that catches my eye is that CLOD is closer to marrying the ground world and air world. I know it's a combat flight sim, but sometimes I am just stunned to think this, even if not overtly intended by the developers, is becoming reality. I won't preach because I lack the technical experience (just a self-taught modeler), but as you gain altitude, polys go through the roof (even with mitigation of lower LODs). That's not something FPSs have to deal with quite so drastically. When they are close to "breaking" your computer, they place a mountain or other obstruction in your way, then only load the next part of the map when you get there. In fairness, and this of course might be specific to my hardware (or lack of computer maintenance skills), CLOD's cities are much larger that ROFs, so the fact that CLOD runs more smoothly than ROF on my syatem suggests to me that some breakthroughs really have occured in CLOD. I realize the current absence of dynamic weather might be the only reason CLOD runs better for me. Still, there is a difference in scope w/regards to gound objects that suggests more has been "accomplished" than might seem on the surface.

[JG52Krupi]

it just doesn't add up. Look, I am no expert in the creation of 3d models or FMs, but from what I've learned after all these years, I would structure the development process in this way:

phase 1: 1 team (1 or 2 3d artists and a skinner) for 3d model production (2 if flyable)
phase 2: 1 team (2 coders) for implementation into model

Phase 1:
1) you choose the plane to implement. 1 week
2) you gather material on it according to the agreed standards: manuals, pictures, blueprints, translations (we're not in the '90s, there's a HUGE community out there with LOADS of information readily available) 2 to 3 weeks.
(Research work can be done by everybody according to availability and collated in a shared folder subdivided into sections)
3) in the meantime 3d model design starts:

3d internal and external body, LODs and DM. 4 weeks for a single engine/6 weeks for a multi-engine.

While this is going on, the skin artist works on the texturing in liaison with the 3d modellers. ongoing with 3d model.

3d model is completed, checked for bugs (possibly by another team) and passed to Phase 2. 1 week

Phase 2:

creation of FMs and DMs (which can happen whilst the other team is working on the 3d model) and implementation into game engine. 2 months

Testing of 3d model and FM. Note that the FM can be initially tested on a 3d mock-up to optimise times. 1 to 2 months

Beta testing 1 week

Final fixes 2 weeks

Now again pardon my lack of competence, but 6 months seem more than enough for the creation of one plane, let's not forget these guys are not doing it in their spare time, but they're steadily working on it (often on weekends apparently!) provided work is happening according to a tidy schedule without interruptions or reassignments to other duties.

When you admit that, is there any need to read the rest?

I know a bit about modelling and have my opinion, but when it comes to FM's other than an aircraft speed I stay away... I don't know about an aircrafts true performance and so avoid the subject.. too many variables. I know about modelling and your underestimating the amount of work and research that has gone and has to go into the models!

[Aer9o]

Well, I admit this is a better communication "package" compared to the last one I gave you my feedback upon (the infamous "balalaika" youtube video...).

Still, you are becoming masters in disguise... (I avoid using the term masters of deception out of politness).
I had to read the text twice to understand. Worthy of SunZu's teachings, brilliantly worded, it earns my respect!
Cudos to your effort!

Now that I have given you credit for the worthwhile effort, please allow me to tell you some things which I appreciated less:
Pretty pictures - little content.
You left us with a memory leak that grows to 4Gb RAM before crashing, obliging us to restart the game after every flight, for weeks now.
Careful reading of your statements makes me deduct that you have not being able to trace the cause of the memory leak much less provide a fix for it.
More concerning, no comment any more about the complete graphics model overhaul (which was the cause for not creating an intermediary patch).
Last but not least, no comments on the current flight model bugs in terms of performance of existing airplanes (e.g. SpitII) and funtionality of airplanes (e.g. JU-88 not working gyros).
Not posting a single date/ timeframe for completion of tasks (any task!) makes me speechless.

No need to worry gentlemen, I will buy your next sequel, and the one after that.

What frustrates me is that I am 46years old, have four university degrees (= my brain is working) but sometimes I feel I am reading communication destined to 12 year olds... :(

~S~

47 ...and feel the same! (with degree in engineering + ...other various qualifications)

[Sternjaeger II]

When you admit that is there any need to read the rest?

well, that was just my professional advice, project managing and solution packages is what I do for a living, but I'm sure that your constructive posts attacking me at any given chance do us more good than harm, carry on.

[Tvrdi]

@Krupi - you know very well that WW2 genre is (way) more popular than WW1....besides, I see at least 3 full servers EVERY night on ROF server list (and be aware its not steam game and majority of players are offliners, by far) unlike CLOD...
@Bongodriver - I would sell my copy right away but somehow this game costs 11 bucks today and I purchased it for 50 bucks on the release day..another fraud

And, Krupi, to be fair (like always) CLOD has a great FM and DM...I really like it...cockpits are beautiful...new sounds...but the core engine is badly optimised...then, ghost trees, not working AA (ingame), landscape (to some extent), thats just bad....thats truth...admit mate....but you wont...

cool signature you have

[Sternjaeger II]

I know a bit about modelling and have my opinion, but when it comes to FM's other than an aircraft speed I stay away... I don't know about an aircrafts true performance and so avoid the subject.. too many variables. I know about modelling and your underestimating the amount of work and research that has gone and has to go into the models!

am I? You obviously never worked for a serious company.

The time estimate I'm giving there is not how much it takes them, but how much it should. If they can't keep up with such numbers, then it's either a case of hiring more people or sacking who you have to substitute them with someone more efficient. This sim thing might be a hobby to you, but to them it's a job.

You can't change your organic? Well either you change your work routines or simply change target. It's like having a pots and pans factory going from making pots and pans (IL-2 Sturmovik) to producing an aeroplane (Cliffs of Dover): either you change your standards, adapt your line of management, hire consultants and reassess personnel, or it's gonna take you forever and you might never deliver one complete product.

Sometimes I really do wonder on what planet some of you guys live...

[JG52Uther]

Bye Gravy AKA Tree_UK AKA Crane

[JG52Krupi]

well, that was just my professional advice, project managing and solution packages is what I do for a living, but I'm sure that your constructive posts attacking me at any given chance do us more good than harm, carry on.

Okay, I apologize for "attacking" you earlier now you can apologize for the generalizing "attack" that us brits think that we won the war at BOB ;)

I am not singling you out, you just happen to be one the few that simply are unaware of the level of detail and work that has gone into the models.

[J.Reb]

Well, I admit this is a better communication "package" compared to the last one I gave you my feedback upon (the infamous "balalaika" youtube video...).

Still, you are becoming masters in disguise... (I avoid using the term masters of deception out of politness).
I had to read the text twice to understand. Worthy of SunZu's teachings, brilliantly worded, it earns my respect!
Cudos to your effort!

Now that I have given you credit for the worthwhile effort, please allow me to tell you some things which I appreciated less:
Pretty pictures - little content.
You left us with a memory leak that grows to 4Gb RAM before crashing, obliging us to restart the game after every flight, for weeks now.
Careful reading of your statements makes me deduct that you have not being able to trace the cause of the memory leak much less provide a fix for it.
More concerning, no comment any more about the complete graphics model overhaul (which was the cause for not creating an intermediary patch).
Last but not least, no comments on the current flight model bugs in terms of performance of existing airplanes (e.g. SpitII) and funtionality of airplanes (e.g. JU-88 not working gyros).
Not posting a single date/ timeframe for completion of tasks (any task!) makes me speechless.

No need to worry gentlemen, I will buy your next sequel, and the one after that.

What frustrates me is that I am 46years old, have four university degrees (= my brain is working) but sometimes I feel I am reading communication destined to 12 year olds... :(

~S~

Not 12 year olds, since the age of reason is 7. Instead I think a lot of software/gaming junkies who do not connect with other areas such as performance, scheduling, and customer satisfaction.

The attitude of "it'll get done when it's done" will get you fired in most companies, and in all reputable companies.

[ATAG_Doc]

Thank you BlackSix and thank all the persons working hard on this project. Many of us really look forward to the I-16 especially! You're doing a fantastic job! Keep it up!

[Aer9o]

Not 12 year olds, since the age of reason is 7. Instead I think a lot of software/gaming junkies who do not connect with other areas such as performance, scheduling, and customer satisfaction.

The attitude of "it'll get done when it's done" will get you fired in most companies, and in all reputable companies.

Sadly there is a tradition of "done when its done" ... the 2 wks thing! which started back in Il2 era! ;)

[JG52Krupi]

am I? You obviously never worked for a serious company.


Hahahaha if only you knew....LAMO you would have to hide in shame!

The time estimate I'm giving there is not how much it takes them, but how much it should. If they can't keep up with such numbers, then it's either a case of hiring more people or sacking who you have to substitute them with someone more efficient. This sim thing might be a hobby to you, but to them it's a job.

Sometimes I really do wonder on what planet some of you guys live...

Yeah I wonder where you live as well.. you clearly don't know what you are talking about.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachment.php?attachmentid=8467&d=1327653715

There is a few weeks/months (happy now sterny) work gone into that model and they still have a lot to do to get it in the game.

Anyway last post on this thread.. hopefully the mods will erase the last few pages.

[Dano]

Well, I admit this is a better communication "package" compared to the last one I gave you my feedback upon (the infamous "balalaika" youtube video...).

Still, you are becoming masters in disguise... (I avoid using the term masters of deception out of politness).
I had to read the text twice to understand. Worthy of SunZu's teachings, brilliantly worded, it earns my respect!
Cudos to your effort!

Now that I have given you credit for the worthwhile effort, please allow me to tell you some things which I appreciated less:
Pretty pictures - little content.
You left us with a memory leak that grows to 4Gb RAM before crashing, obliging us to restart the game after every flight, for weeks now.
Careful reading of your statements makes me deduct that you have not being able to trace the cause of the memory leak much less provide a fix for it.
More concerning, no comment any more about the complete graphics model overhaul (which was the cause for not creating an intermediary patch).
Last but not least, no comments on the current flight model bugs in terms of performance of existing airplanes (e.g. SpitII) and funtionality of airplanes (e.g. JU-88 not working gyros).
Not posting a single date/ timeframe for completion of tasks (any task!) makes me speechless.

No need to worry gentlemen, I will buy your next sequel, and the one after that.

What frustrates me is that I am 46years old, have four university degrees (= my brain is working) but sometimes I feel I am reading communication destined to 12 year olds... :(

~S~

Maybe you need to read it a third time...

[csThor]

Sternjaeger you grossly underestimate the amount of research neccessary to create a model as shown in the screenshots (with all the interior parts, wing ribs etc). For that stuff you need solid data and not just any cr@p a google search finds you. That stuff requires something better than a few thrown-together TGA schemes ... On top of that you need original manuals to study and understand the various systems of the type, manuals which often are either unavailable at all, only partially available or not available in the language you need them (remember the development team speaks native russian, not german or english). I remember Dietger and Jippo spent one and a half years only on collecting the necessary manuals to begin modelling the Ju 88 back in 1946. And, let's be honest, the 1946 Ju 88 is a much less sophisticated model than the CloD one.

[Sternjaeger II]

Hahahaha if only you knew....LAMO you would have to hide in shame!

Yeah, if only I knew :rolleyes:


Yeah I wonder where you live as well.. you clearly don't know what you are talking about.

There is a few weeks work gone into that model and they still have a lot to do to get it in the game.


I think you answered yourself. A few weeks work into the model and look how far they got. I wonder if you know what you talk about..

[Tvrdi]

Sternjaeger you grossly underestimate the amount of research neccessary to create a model as shown in the screenshots (with all the interior parts, wing ribs etc). For that stuff you need solid data and not just any cr@p a google search finds you. That stuff requires something better than a few thrown-together TGA schemes ... On top of that you need original manuals to study and understand the various systems of the type, manuals which often are either unavailable at all, only partially available or not available in the language you need them (remember the development team speaks native russian, not german or english). I remember Dietger and Jippo spent one and a half years only on collecting the necessary manuals to begin modelling the Ju 88 back in 1946. And, let's be honest, the 1946 Ju 88 is a much less sophisticated model than the CloD one.

and how many years 1C had for CLOD? :-) Oh we have all the main planes from the BOB but we dont have a working (without major slowdowns when effects are near) game engine...oh nooo!!!!!

Im not whining...Im angry....with right...thats all...get over it...

see you in a year..or maybe sooner...who knows...Luthier will promise something im sure...sometimes...so you can all get wet (for some reason)
goodbye

[Abbeville-Boy]

I obviously don't have a problem, I don't endulge in obsessive complaining and have only 1 account here.



Wrong! your problem is too many posts, non stop all the time
1300 post count not even one year with the franchise
you always see the need to chime in, going pm would be better for all of us
no school, no work = to much free time

[J.Reb]

I obviously don't have a problem, I don't endulge in obsessive complaining and have only 1 account here.

I will not trade insults with you.



TO A MOD

I am tired of the veiled insults of Bewolf and bongodriver, I see them as unnecessary and unfounded. I would like to request

1. That you investigate me, any aliases, any posts of mine, and anything else you consider relevant to full disclosure of my standing as a good member. I shall assist in any way I can.

2. That assuming I get a clean bill of health, you will warn Bewolf and bongodriver that if they continue with the harrassment they are banned without further discussion.

[csThor]

Harping on about it won't change anything, either, Tvrdi. I just replied to Sternjaeger and his - IMO - grossly optimistic development timeframe estimation. I didn't say anything about previous development or what MG does.

[J.Reb]

Hi Uther,

Sorry to trouble you with this, but I am tired of the veiled insults of Bewolf and bongodriver, I see them as unnecessary and unfounded. I would like to request

1. That you investigate me, any aliases, any posts of mine, and anything else you consider relevant to full disclosure of my standing as a good member. I shall assist in any way I can.

2. That assuming I get a clean bill of health, you will warn Bewolf and bongodriver that if they continue with the harrassment they are banned without further discussion.

Thanks,
J.Reb

[Abbeville-Boy]

It’s our pleasure to continue our weekly updates in 2012!

From now on our Friday updates will include both information on Cliffs of Dover (when we have something exciting to reveal) as well as updates on the state of our not-yet-announced sequel.


ok we must wait

[philip.ed]

Awesome update!

I got bored of the drivel and skipped from page 8 to this one. Have I missed anything?

Cheers Luther and B6 for taking the time to do this. Every Friday would be awesome, but don't you think bi-weekly updates would be so much more apt? ;)

Just kidding

[bongodriver]

Hi Uther,

Sorry to trouble you with this, but I am tired of the veiled insults of Bewolf and bongodriver, I see them as unnecessary and unfounded. I would like to request

1. That you investigate me, any aliases, any posts of mine, and anything else you consider relevant to full disclosure of my standing as a good member. I shall assist in any way I can.

2. That assuming I get a clean bill of health, you will warn Bewolf and bongodriver that if they continue with the harrassment they are banned without further discussion.

Thanks,
J.Reb

Listen here matey, I made 1 single reply to a post questioning your legitimacy (and gave very valid observation) if you feel you have been getting alot of attention from me it must be from other post I make to your more familiar presence here......

[carguy_]

:cool:
Thanks! A great update.
It is good to hear on the progress and solving the bugs, but I already knew that. You guys just take your time. When the time comes, many of us will buy the new game, preferably another Collerctor`s Edition. I just hope you can come up with a way to keep the development going. As you wrote, it is much harder nowadays. A DLC concept IMO is a must here.

Oh and I forgot ye olde saying for good luck :
BlackSix YOU DA MAN!

For example, there are team members who are great at making 3D models of tanks. They can’t just switch over and make a cockpit one day. They’d need many months of retraining. And even more than that, a tank modeler can’t just come in one day and fix a memory leak in the network code. All he can really do is make great tank models regardless of what a network programmer or a map maker are doing.

Could you be more specific?

[bongodriver]

Wrong! your problem is too many posts, non stop all the time
1300 post count not even one year with the franchise
you always see the need to chime in, going pm would be better for all of us
no school, no work = to much free time

So I get involved with the community here, outside of that you have no knowlege of my real situation, your post is quite frankly a very personal attack with no justification given that I have never exchanged any oppinions with you.

[kalimba]

The link does not work any more but I have quotes from that thread here http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=382661&postcount=1131

Jason says that all the malcontents and whiners did too much damage to their project. And I know that they moderate their forums much more strictly than 1C.

That is an interesting comment from Jason. So why so ''many'' malcontents and whiners if the '' others'' consider the game very satisfying ?
What defines the boundaries between unjustifed whining and unsatisfied customers ? Does it mean the game works well for 70 % of the clientele , and the other 30 % will never get it to work because of their plateform , CPUs and GPUs , wich 777 cannot control ? Do all developpers really beleive they can achieve a 100% working product for 100% of their customers ?
I dont think so. It would be then be normal to have quite e few very unhappy guys crying for injustice on the forums. They would get flamed, but if the product isnt working for them, can we just kik them off ?
And is the number of complain really representative of the success rate ?
Would it mean the game is NOT built for large audiences ?
Lets face it, those niche sims are very hard to build. The clientele is very demanding. This is reality.
So why a forum ? What is the purpose of a forum ? Who needs it ?
Wouldn't 1C be better off with a only read forum with updates with few comments from the developpers at this point ? THey dont need our feedback anymore...Even the positive ones. They certainly dont need the negative either.

Salute !

[planespotter]

Nice clear update on the state of sim developing, thanks L! Personally i can't get excited about BoM (Russian planes? Moscow? Yawn...) but I will buy it for the game fixes and to support devs. Take your time guys. CoD works fine on my machine and I am really enjoying.

[Bewolf]

That is an interesting comment from Jason. So why so ''many'' malcontents and whiners if the '' others'' consider the game very satisfying ?
What defines the boundaries between unjustifed whining and unsatisfied customers ? Does it mean the game works well for 70 % of the clientele , and the other 30 % will never get it to work because of their plateform , CPUs and GPUs , wich 777 cannot control ? Do all developpers really beleive they can achieve a 100% working product for 100% of their customers ?
I dont think so. It would be then be normal to have quite e few very unhappy guys crying for injustice on the forums. They would get flamed, but if the product isnt working for them, can we just kik them off ?
And is the number of complain really representative of the success rate ?
Would it mean the game is NOT built for large audiences ?
Lets face it, those niche sims are very hard to build. The clientele is very demanding. This is reality.
So why a forum ? What is the purpose of a forum ? Who needs it ?
Wouldn't 1C be better off with a only read forum with updates with few comments from the developpers at this point ? THey dont need our feedback anymore...Even the positive ones. They certainly dont need the negative either.

Salute !

Because there still is the idea of a working community going around, with people exchanging ideas and skins, tactics, finding squads and friends to fly with, instead of a place some individuals go in only to vent their real life furstrations though the proxy of this game and ruining it for everybody else because they consider themselves and their individual happyness the center of the universe.

[Sternjaeger II]

Sternjaeger you grossly underestimate the amount of research neccessary to create a model as shown in the screenshots (with all the interior parts, wing ribs etc). For that stuff you need solid data and not just any cr@p a google search finds you. That stuff requires something better than a few thrown-together TGA schemes ... On top of that you need original manuals to study and understand the various systems of the type, manuals which often are either unavailable at all, only partially available or not available in the language you need them (remember the development team speaks native russian, not german or english). I remember Dietger and Jippo spent one and a half years only on collecting the necessary manuals to begin modelling the Ju 88 back in 1946. And, let's be honest, the 1946 Ju 88 is a much less sophisticated model than the CloD one.

well I provided materials and translations both to you guys for your expansions and Oleg for IL-2 and CloD, and all it takes is knowing what you're doing. People might have material but they're not necessarily competent on a subject.

It's down to the devt. team to choose the right collaborators, get them involved in the creation of a database (which is what I'm working on at the moment).
Other resources/drawings/manuals can be bought online, again the Internet is your friend.

If you can't find enough info on a specific plane, just put it away and concentrate on another project, simple.

I don't know whether Daidalos Team is a fulltime job or not, but again, I can tell you that there are ways to optimise production and make the best out of it, no matter how complicated it is.

I work and collaborate with the car manufacturing industry, universities and private businesses, reassessing procedures and standards for thousands of employees, I'm more than confident I would be capable of helping a small software house to reassess their work process. Considering my interest on the subject, I'm even ready to do it for free.

[Drum_tastic]

You and other complainers must have a different game version than this guy has. This is real online gameplay footage on ATAG server that proves that the game is in a playable condition with recent patches installed via Steam (unless you have a pirated version).
http://www.youtube.com/user/Semashko27/videos
If someone states the opposite please proved a proof as solid and evident as this one.

However I think the devs deserve criticism because they did not implement an issue tracking system yet as discussed here http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=24106
BlackSix, could you please ask Ilya if he can talk to 1cpublishing.eu admins to install such a system on this site and provide forum users rights to report and vote for bugs, issues and proposals there. Redmine (http://www.redmine.org/) and Bugzilla (http://www.bugzilla.org/) have voting capabilities and are free IIRC. This system will make life much easier for Ilya on the one hand and will prevent forgetting about not working features like COOPs on the other hand.

PS. Those who experience online launcher crash please try this solution http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=384729&postcount=124

Doubt I would have paid £50 for a pirated version mate, so maybe pay a little more attention to what you are reading.

Also my post wasn't a complaint - wake up!

[Bewolf]

well I provided material both to you guys for your expansions and Oleg for IL-2 and CloD, and all it takes is knowing what you're doing. People might have material but they're not necessarily competent on a subject.

It's down to the devt. team to choose the right collaborators, get them involved in the creation of a database (which is what I'm working on at the moment).
Other resources/drawings/manuals can be bought online, again the Internet is your friend.

If you can't find enough info on a specific plane, just put it away and concentrate on another project, simple.

I don't know whether Daidalos Team is a fulltime job or not, but again, I can tell you that there are ways to optimise production and make the best out of it, no matter how complicated it is.

I work and collaborate with the car manufacturing industry, universities and private businesses, I'm more than confident I would be capable of helping a small software house to reassess their work process. Considering my interest on the subject, I'm even ready to do it for free.

Sounds cool, I remember the days in IL2 when people desperately looked for material, checked museums, private collectors, archieves to find blueprints of some of the more obscure planes but also for a lot of german mainstay airplanes (lots was destroyed in the last year of the war). An expert in this field who is much more competent then all others who laid their hands on this so far I am sure you will be welcomed with open arms.

[katdogfizzow]

Awesome

[Sternjaeger II]

Sounds cool, I remember the days in IL2 when people desperately looked for material, checked museums, private collectors, archieves to find blueprints of some of the more obscure planes but also for a lot of german mainstay airplanes (lots was destroyed in the last year of the war). An expert in this field who is much more competent then all others who laid their hands on this so far I am sure you will be welcomed with open arms.

It's a huge learning curve, liking aeroplanes or reading some books doesn't make you an expert. The expert is someone who has a sound general knowledge and is capable of researching material inherent to the required task. Assembly manuals, operation manuals, part catalogues, test pilot notes, understanding the available data (and above all not taking them for divine word) and last but not least knowing when, unless you find more material on the subject, you will have to give up.

when you're doing research money is your best friend. You need to budget for research if you want it done hey presto and in a proficient way.

Also, you need to know what you need to look for. If I said "I need material on the Macchi 202", I need to specify what I actually need, and above all do it in collaboration who's aviation and engineering literate. I don't need colour profiles, I don't necessarily need 500 B&W wartime pictures, or one picture of a cockpit is not necessary the absolute truth about the looks of an interior. I need to know what that specific panel, dial or knob is for, whether it was standard or changed on various variants, I need to know how all the moving parts work and why, what the possible faults are, what are the engineering shortcomings.. It's a HUGE task, but it wouldn't necessarily take months.

It's hard work, and not always easy, but it's a vital part of development, especially if you want to avoid doing things twice.

[FG28_Kodiak]

@Blacksix
Ok i see a I16 with weels and one with skies. So will we get a autumn and a winter map?

[kalimba]

Because there still is the idea of a working community going around, with people exchanging ideas and skins, tactics, finding squads and friends to fly with, instead of a place some individuals go in only to vent their real life furstrations though the proxy of this game and ruining it for everybody else because they consider themselves and their individual happyness the center of the universe.

That is true, but also problematic. How can you avoid '' damage'' to a product like Jason described in his post, and keeping the forum alive ?
By removing all the bad comments ? Forum are here so everyone can express their opinions, and if someone who is new in this community wants to know if it is worth spending $60.00 and PC updates for a game, he is entiteled to all the feedbacks. So what is the good of a forum, if it is also the reason why a game is canned ? How do you deal with that ?
I understand that we may have our post deleted for speculating, or badmouthing without knowing the fact about some issues, but what then when we do have the information ? Having the information does give credential to good AND bad comments.
And yes, individual happyness is everyone ultimate goal in life. It his how you manage to reach it that makes the difference. ;)
SAlute !

[carguy_]

Just take your game and throw it into a bin and file it under "lesson learned". I paid 70€ for my special edition. Am I happy? No, for sure not.
Am I a destructive entitlement junkie who had to register on this forum under a different alias just to put my pile of human digestion constantly highjacking threads here? Neither.

If Luthier and team require another year to get this game going, then so be it. I will then treat it as if it was only released by then and treat the current sitiuation like participating in an open beta. That is something I can live with it. If you can't, sell your copy and leave.
That is exactly how I feel.

[jamesdietz]

Looking forward to the new sim ,,& esp the new patch whenever!

[addman]

Thanks for the update, I'll refrain from further commenting.:)

[smink1701]

Thanks. Nice to know we will be getting regular updates on Friday. :)

[kalimba]

If you can't, sell your copy and leave.

Sell it to ... ? :grin:

Salute !

[csThor]

It's a huge learning curve, liking aeroplanes or reading some books doesn't make you an expert.

That sentence should be plastered on the wallpapers of some people I can think of. ;)

It's a HUGE task, but it wouldn't necessarily take months.

If you can get it in your native language, no it shouldn't take this long. But translate it? Into russian for example? That is a completely different beast. That is the crux here, understanding material which is not necessarily in your own native language (and, to make it worse, possibly explaining what you got to a programmer who doesn't speak that language at all). Oh dear, what a nightmarish thought ... :-?

[pupo162]

You and other complainers must have a different game version than this guy has. This is real online gameplay footage on ATAG server that proves that the game is in a playable condition with recent patches installed via Steam (unless you have a pirated version).
http://www.youtube.com/user/Semashko27/videos
If someone states the opposite please proved a proof as solid and evident as this one.
[/url]


Are you kidding me? those videos have some preatty bad stutteting. not as bad as mine, but enough to be considered "bad gameplay". i was expecting that kind of stutteirng in a mid/low range pc like mine. not in a top gen pc like mr X has.

[Jatta Raso]

i would participate in the debate but i'm allergic to fireproof wear... :mrgreen:

[Strike]

Im not whining...Im angry....with right...thats all...get over it...

see you in a year..

I dare you to disappear until 27.01.2012 :)

Otherwise, this bashing between RoF and CloD isn't getting us anywhere. If cluttering up the internet with hate-spam is your main goal in life, the joke is on you. I play both sims, I have my own reasons for preferring bits and pieces of both of them. If I could have it my way, I would combine the best of RoF and CloD's game engines, but that would probably be a game set for release around the time where Skynet's robots are erasing humans from the planet.

If you ask me personally, my opinion is that Luthier is right about one very essential thing. When they set off with this goal "make 2nd Gen IL-2 series BETTER than first" they chewed over A LOT more than they could swallow.

What it is is really like comparing a 18th century cannon towards a M109 Howitzer. Imagine the issues you could have with a cannon= Fuse wet, wrong amount of gunpowder, wheel falls off cannon rig etc... Then imagine a M109... think of the million pieces of hardware and software tied together in a very finely tuned engineering masterpiece. What we have is CloD.. aka the M109 that - unfortunately - was not finely tuned at release. So now what? Well the gun fires, it can drive around but every now and then the turret hangs up and the thing breaks down. Annoying as "F" and you probably wished you had a damn 18th century cannon instead :P But the point is here, the devs have to take into account a system so vast, any small tweak may have a large impact in the end of the coding string. A simple parameter in the JU87 AI divebomb routine config, may render all other aircraft with bombs to commit CFIT suicide. And now you have to write new code, that may effect other elements of the game in a negative behaviour, so you need to open a whole set of branches in a huge coding-tree only to implement a simple alteration of an AI tactic.

Again, to step away from this wall of text, I feel that Luthier set the bar too high. Hence temporary(?) removal of advanced weather features, animations, atmosphere etc etc. As the project moved along, things must only have become more and more difficult. Making all parts of this game engine communicate and cooperate properly is a huge undertaking. It's miles ahead of anything else on the market when it comes to damage modeling. The potential that lies in the game engine to introduce player controlled ground/air/sea vehicles is also a strong competative factor one should consider. It could potentially lure tank-warfare/naval-warfare enthusiasts into the genre some day.

But what about us? All the waiting? What about our satisfaction? The bang for our bucks?

Well mate, it's all up to YOU! Nobody can tell you how you are supposed to react when playing this sim. It's all up to your expectations and needs. It's wether IL-2 CloD hits you on all the right spots, or completely strokes you against your hairs that will help you judge the game.

I can only speak for myself when I say that when I fly my trusty spit over the french coast I get excited only by the fact that some german AA gun may target me, and the damage I potentially can receive could do anything really, but based on the accurate calculations of bullet velocity, ammunition type, impact angle, shrapnel, material strength, penetration, structural consequences, component damage etc etc. It's thrilling to know all of this stuff is being calculated as the sim plays out, and no outcome is identical.

What I miss is working launcher.exe during MP, more varied and indepth sound, better AI, campaign etc.. But as long as they claim they are working on this, I can wait a few months. What I have now gives me the kicks I need - a.k.a the good outweigh/balance the bad.

As for RoF, it's the wrong forum to be discussing, but I didn't play it until a year after I bought it I was so disappointed. 5 flyables or something like that, loads of bugs and unoptimized content, menus etc.. As for now, I enjoy it, but more in the essence of how I think of BF3 and ARMAII. I play BF3 for hours and hours for a great action game, with even balancing and 15 second respawn. But I play ARMA II for the more "hardcore" game, which happens to have bogged physics etc, but gives me a LOT greater feeling of "acheiving" something. RoF is like an online deathmatch frenzy, all planes are so balanced, but you always get shot down by a turning camel or Dr.1 . 'Special damage' seems utterly random (fuel leak, oil leak, ammo explosion, fire) and wing damage is just climbing %. The higher the % damage is the easier it breaks off. For me, I feel nothing special when gunning at planes in RoF. It's like ok theres a 50% chance the wings come off, there's a 25% chance the engine catches fire and a 25% chance the pilot dies. All the trailer videos showcasing advanced engine models etc feels like a marketing stunt to me. In CloD at least my individual cylinders can misfire! But Rise of Flight has been more immersive due to some cool effects such as the dynamic wind, rain/blood spatter, sound etc. But then again it all feels so built up around core elements such as "pretty art-like graphics" and balanced flight models.

So you can basically ignore my opinion on CloD and RoF and have your own, but bashing them back and forth in a thread for discussing the upcoming expansion and promised friday updates is just rude. I totally welcome and promote constructive feedback, but this is NOT the place for waging forum warfare and CERTAINLY NOT the place for addressing problems with RoF :p It could be an own thread in the pilots lounge: "IL-2 CloD - RoF: Comparisons".

I would like it to be made common knowledge just exactly how complicated this simulator actually is, what's being taken into account, what's being rendered and then perhaps everyone would understand the amount of time and work is required to actually "fix" something. Too many people claim that "Oh well fixing this should be easy". Well there it is^^ In the update stated by the boss himself. It is almost NEVER easy - be sure. ;)

As for the update? I base my expectations on the previous update records, and sooner or later, we're all bound to be positively surprised aren't we? :P

I've bought the game, there's nothing I can do about it now whether I like it or not, besides whining about it, or doing something more productive*. Do like Chuck Norris, choose the latter.


*(there's a huge list of productive stuff to do, pm me if you need advice)


Thanks for the update Luthier, I'll bee seeing your update next week ;) Be sure

[Bewolf]

That is true, but also problematic. How can you avoid '' damage'' to a product like Jason described in his post, and keeping the forum alive ?
By removing all the bad comments ? Forum are here so everyone can express their opinions, and if someone who is new in this community wants to know if it is worth spending $60.00 and PC updates for a game, he is entiteled to all the feedbacks. So what is the good of a forum, if it is also the reason why a game is canned ? How do you deal with that ?
I understand that we may have our post deleted for speculating, or badmouthing without knowing the fact about some issues, but what then when we do have the information ? Having the information does give credential to good AND bad comments.
And yes, individual happyness is everyone ultimate goal in life. It his how you manage to reach it that makes the difference. ;)
SAlute !

Actually i am not a fan of banning or deleting comments at all. Or even closing threads. Move them to a "special" bin section maybe if it really does not work out otherwise and if ppl "directly" attack mods after getting warned, also ban them.

IMHO it's up to a community to take over the responsebility to make it work. Unluckily these days so many folks consider themselves the only person that matters, Ayn Rand style, to a degree that a constructive community is hard to achieve. I am also at a loss on how to fix it when all what people are worried about is money. Guess they will have to choke themselves to death before they realize that going into a community with blazing guns demanding all the goodies, or else! usually has some negative effects in the long run.

[recoilfx]

I notice that ATI cards choke more on the stutterers. I had a 6950 at 1920x1080 and the micro-stutters were very noticeable when flying low.

When I switched to 570gtx I am mostly @ >60fps (Everything high, textures orignal, building details low, vsync on, full screen on, SSAO off) and I don't have stutters what so ever. Other than the particle animations (dust & clouds), everything is super smooth.

Of course, once I go 2560x1440, the stutters come back.

[secretone]

I appreciate your endless efforts to bring us this cutting-edge simulation!

The I-16 model that you have shown us today is absolutely beautiful!

[skouras]

thanks for the update B6 and team:grin:

[JG52Krupi]

I dare you to disappear until 27.01.2012 :)

Otherwise, this bashing between RoF and CloD isn't getting us anywhere. If cluttering up the internet with hate-spam is your main goal in life, the joke is on you. I play both sims, I have my own reasons for preferring bits and pieces of both of them. If I could have it my way, I would combine the best of RoF and CloD's game engines, but that would probably be a game set for release around the time where Skynet's robots are erasing humans from the planet.

If you ask me personally, my opinion is that Luthier is right about one very essential thing. When they set off with this goal "make 2nd Gen IL-2 series BETTER than first" they chewed over A LOT more than they could swallow.

What it is is really like comparing a 18th century cannon towards a M109 Howitzer. Imagine the issues you could have with a cannon= Fuse wet, wrong amount of gunpowder, wheel falls off cannon rig etc... Then imagine a M109... think of the million pieces of hardware and software tied together in a very finely tuned engineering masterpiece. What we have is CloD.. aka the M109 that - unfortunately - was not finely tuned at release. So now what? Well the gun fires, it can drive around but every now and then the turret hangs up and the thing breaks down. Annoying as "F" and you probably wished you had a damn 18th century cannon instead :P But the point is here, the devs have to take into account a system so vast, any small tweak may have a large impact in the end of the coding string. A simple parameter in the JU87 AI divebomb routine config, may render all other aircraft with bombs to commit CFIT suicide. And now you have to write new code, that may effect other elements of the game in a negative behaviour, so you need to open a whole set of branches in a huge coding-tree only to implement a simple alteration of an AI tactic.

Again, to step away from this wall of text, I feel that Luthier set the bar too high. Hence temporary(?) removal of advanced weather features, animations, atmosphere etc etc. As the project moved along, things must only have become more and more difficult. Making all parts of this game engine communicate and cooperate properly is a huge undertaking. It's miles ahead of anything else on the market when it comes to damage modeling. The potential that lies in the game engine to introduce player controlled ground/air/sea vehicles is also a strong competative factor one should consider. It could potentially lure tank-warfare/naval-warfare enthusiasts into the genre some day.

But what about us? All the waiting? What about our satisfaction? The bang for our bucks?

Well mate, it's all up to YOU! Nobody can tell you how you are supposed to react when playing this sim. It's all up to your expectations and needs. It's wether IL-2 CloD hits you on all the right spots, or completely strokes you against your hairs that will help you judge the game.

I can only speak for myself when I say that when I fly my trusty spit over the french coast I get excited only by the fact that some german AA gun may target me, and the damage I potentially can receive could do anything really, but based on the accurate calculations of bullet velocity, ammunition type, impact angle, shrapnel, material strength, penetration, structural consequences, component damage etc etc. It's thrilling to know all of this stuff is being calculated as the sim plays out, and no outcome is identical.

What I miss is working launcher.exe during MP, more varied and indepth sound, better AI, campaign etc.. But as long as they claim they are working on this, I can wait a few months. What I have now gives me the kicks I need - a.k.a the good outweigh/balance the bad.

As for RoF, it's the wrong forum to be discussing, but I didn't play it until a year after I bought it I was so disappointed. 5 flyables or something like that, loads of bugs and unoptimized content, menus etc.. As for now, I enjoy it, but more in the essence of how I think of BF3 and ARMAII. I play BF3 for hours and hours for a great action game, with even balancing and 15 second respawn. But I play ARMA II for the more "hardcore" game, which happens to have bogged physics etc, but gives me a LOT greater feeling of "acheiving" something. RoF is like an online deathmatch frenzy, all planes are so balanced, but you always get shot down by a turning camel or Dr.1 . 'Special damage' seems utterly random (fuel leak, oil leak, ammo explosion, fire) and wing damage is just climbing %. The higher the % damage is the easier it breaks off. For me, I feel nothing special when gunning at planes in RoF. It's like ok theres a 50% chance the wings come off, there's a 25% chance the engine catches fire and a 25% chance the pilot dies. All the trailer videos showcasing advanced engine models etc feels like a marketing stunt to me. In CloD at least my individual cylinders can misfire! But Rise of Flight has been more immersive due to some cool effects such as the dynamic wind, rain/blood spatter, sound etc. But then again it all feels so built up around core elements such as "pretty art-like graphics" and balanced flight models.

So you can basically ignore my opinion on CloD and RoF and have your own, but bashing them back and forth in a thread for discussing the upcoming expansion and promised friday updates is just rude. I totally welcome and promote constructive feedback, but this is NOT the place for waging forum warfare and CERTAINLY NOT the place for addressing problems with RoF :p It could be an own thread in the pilots lounge: "IL-2 CloD - RoF: Comparisons".

I would like it to be made common knowledge just exactly how complicated this simulator actually is, what's being taken into account, what's being rendered and then perhaps everyone would understand the amount of time and work is required to actually "fix" something. Too many people claim that "Oh well fixing this should be easy". Well there it is^^ In the update stated by the boss himself. It is almost NEVER easy - be sure. ;)

As for the update? I base my expectations on the previous update records, and sooner or later, we're all bound to be positively surprised aren't we? :P

I've bought the game, there's nothing I can do about it now whether I like it or not, besides whining about it, or doing something more productive*. Do like Chuck Norris, choose the latter.


*(there's a huge list of productive stuff to do, pm me if you need advice)


Thanks for the update Luthier, I'll bee seeing your update next week ;) Be sure

Best post yet, thought you were Blackdog for a second then (wall of text and eloquent) not like your normal posts...

I kid ;) good job.

[Bewolf]

I dare you to disappear until 27.01.2012 :)

Otherwise, this bashing between RoF and CloD isn't getting us anywhere. If cluttering up the internet with hate-spam is your main goal in life, the joke is on you. I play both sims, I have my own reasons for preferring bits and pieces of both of them. If I could have it my way, I would combine the best of RoF and CloD's game engines, but that would probably be a game set for release around the time where Skynet's robots are erasing humans from the planet.

If you ask me personally, my opinion is that Luthier is right about one very essential thing. When they set off with this goal "make 2nd Gen IL-2 series BETTER than first" they chewed over A LOT more than they could swallow.

What it is is really like comparing a 18th century cannon towards a M109 Howitzer. Imagine the issues you could have with a cannon= Fuse wet, wrong amount of gunpowder, wheel falls off cannon rig etc... Then imagine a M109... think of the million pieces of hardware and software tied together in a very finely tuned engineering masterpiece. What we have is CloD.. aka the M109 that - unfortunately - was not finely tuned at release. So now what? Well the gun fires, it can drive around but every now and then the turret hangs up and the thing breaks down. Annoying as "F" and you probably wished you had a damn 18th century cannon instead :P But the point is here, the devs have to take into account a system so vast, any small tweak may have a large impact in the end of the coding string. A simple parameter in the JU87 AI divebomb routine config, may render all other aircraft with bombs to commit CFIT suicide. And now you have to write new code, that may effect other elements of the game in a negative behaviour, so you need to open a whole set of branches in a huge coding-tree only to implement a simple alteration of an AI tactic.

Again, to step away from this wall of text, I feel that Luthier set the bar too high. Hence temporary(?) removal of advanced weather features, animations, atmosphere etc etc. As the project moved along, things must only have become more and more difficult. Making all parts of this game engine communicate and cooperate properly is a huge undertaking. It's miles ahead of anything else on the market when it comes to damage modeling. The potential that lies in the game engine to introduce player controlled ground/air/sea vehicles is also a strong competative factor one should consider. It could potentially lure tank-warfare/naval-warfare enthusiasts into the genre some day.

But what about us? All the waiting? What about our satisfaction? The bang for our bucks?

Well mate, it's all up to YOU! Nobody can tell you how you are supposed to react when playing this sim. It's all up to your expectations and needs. It's wether IL-2 CloD hits you on all the right spots, or completely strokes you against your hairs that will help you judge the game.

I can only speak for myself when I say that when I fly my trusty spit over the french coast I get excited only by the fact that some german AA gun may target me, and the damage I potentially can receive could do anything really, but based on the accurate calculations of bullet velocity, ammunition type, impact angle, shrapnel, material strength, penetration, structural consequences, component damage etc etc. It's thrilling to know all of this stuff is being calculated as the sim plays out, and no outcome is identical.

What I miss is working launcher.exe during MP, more varied and indepth sound, better AI, campaign etc.. But as long as they claim they are working on this, I can wait a few months. What I have now gives me the kicks I need - a.k.a the good outweigh/balance the bad.

As for RoF, it's the wrong forum to be discussing, but I didn't play it until a year after I bought it I was so disappointed. 5 flyables or something like that, loads of bugs and unoptimized content, menus etc.. As for now, I enjoy it, but more in the essence of how I think of BF3 and ARMAII. I play BF3 for hours and hours for a great action game, with even balancing and 15 second respawn. But I play ARMA II for the more "hardcore" game, which happens to have bogged physics etc, but gives me a LOT greater feeling of "acheiving" something. RoF is like an online deathmatch frenzy, all planes are so balanced, but you always get shot down by a turning camel or Dr.1 . 'Special damage' seems utterly random (fuel leak, oil leak, ammo explosion, fire) and wing damage is just climbing %. The higher the % damage is the easier it breaks off. For me, I feel nothing special when gunning at planes in RoF. It's like ok theres a 50% chance the wings come off, there's a 25% chance the engine catches fire and a 25% chance the pilot dies. All the trailer videos showcasing advanced engine models etc feels like a marketing stunt to me. In CloD at least my individual cylinders can misfire! But Rise of Flight has been more immersive due to some cool effects such as the dynamic wind, rain/blood spatter, sound etc. But then again it all feels so built up around core elements such as "pretty art-like graphics" and balanced flight models.

So you can basically ignore my opinion on CloD and RoF and have your own, but bashing them back and forth in a thread for discussing the upcoming expansion and promised friday updates is just rude. I totally welcome and promote constructive feedback, but this is NOT the place for waging forum warfare and CERTAINLY NOT the place for addressing problems with RoF :p It could be an own thread in the pilots lounge: "IL-2 CloD - RoF: Comparisons".

I would like it to be made common knowledge just exactly how complicated this simulator actually is, what's being taken into account, what's being rendered and then perhaps everyone would understand the amount of time and work is required to actually "fix" something. Too many people claim that "Oh well fixing this should be easy". Well there it is^^ In the update stated by the boss himself. It is almost NEVER easy - be sure. ;)

As for the update? I base my expectations on the previous update records, and sooner or later, we're all bound to be positively surprised aren't we? :P

I've bought the game, there's nothing I can do about it now whether I like it or not, besides whining about it, or doing something more productive*. Do like Chuck Norris, choose the latter.


*(there's a huge list of productive stuff to do, pm me if you need advice)


Thanks for the update Luthier, I'll bee seeing your update next week ;) Be sure

+1
That's it in a...well, coconut shell

[kestrel79]

The I-16 is looking great! Thanks for the update. Let it be known that the majority of people are patient and appreciate the updates, but we are less vocal.

I think the devs are going to be pretty tight lipped about any new gameplay features from now on, there's a lot of flight sim competition right now. World of Planes just got a new website and reveiled their plans, DCS is doing a P-51, then you have microsoft flight and RoF too.

Let's all get back on topic and talk about that I-16! No one has barely mentioned it! It looks great. Those skis look really cool. Always loved snow landings in IL2. I think the model looks very sharp. No other sims really model the internal structure and engine parts like we are getting here, I think that explains for the extra time they take to create compared to other sims.

[csThor]

Some people behave as if the state of Clod got them thrown out of their house/apartment, their car confiscated, their wife/girlfriend lost to some gigolo and a layoff at their job. And all of the drama for a mere computer game? (and people sometimes accuse me of having no life) :shock:

[Strike]

Best post yet, thought you were Blackdog for a second

Best accidental compliment of the year mate ;)

[grunge]

AWESOME that Rata! Good to see that the project is growing and under constant improvement!

~S~

[kalimba]

Actually i am not a fan of banning or deleting comments at all. Or even closing threads. Move them to a "special" bin section maybe if it really does not work out otherwise and if ppl "directly" attack mods after getting warned, also ban them.

IMHO it's up to a community to take over the responsebility to make it work. Unluckily these days so many folks consider themselves the only person that matters, Ayn Rand style, to a degree that a constructive community is hard to achieve. I am also at a loss on how to fix it when all what people are worried about is money. Guess they will have to choke themselves to death before they realize that going into a community with blazing guns demanding all the goodies, or else! usually has some negative effects in the long run.

Agreed on both points. I did suggest to one moderator to have a ''special'' thread where we could vent out a bit. Of course, personnal attacks and bad language would have been forbidden...well, my thread was deleted by this moderator! I would say that the age span here is quite large. So are individuals values and cultures. It would be nice for the community to auto-behave and auto-regulate itself, but we are like a small town here. We need governance. About the money...Well, I am into RC with my 7 yo kid now.
I bought a top simulation..Very nice. $130.00 for the sim, and $40.00 for the remote. Its niche and its good. Works flawlessly. 150 models perfectly rendered and FM to match... IMHO, this is what we should pay for COD ...100% working of course :rolleyes:

Salute !

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Thanks for the info BS and Luthier! Things are looking good!

[csThor]

The issue is that people harp on about it, whenever appropriate and especially when not. I, for example, am not particularly happy with the state of things but I have better things to do than spend my time throwing tantrums on message boards. Simply put I shelved the game for the time being and don't expect any "enjoyment" for the forseeable future. I have other hobbies I can waste my freetime on and I don't really understand where the need to throw a tantrum on what is essentially a 50€ piece of software.

[Sternjaeger II]

That sentence should be plastered on the wallpapers of some people I can think of. ;)

LOLz tell me about it.. god knows the amount of anoraks I have to deal with at airshows and in other mundane aviation events: the best one was a chap trying to convince me that the compass in a Tiger Moth I flew in with was in fact a radar screen.


If you can get it in your native language, no it shouldn't take this long. But translate it? Into russian for example? That is a completely different beast. That is the crux here, understanding material which is not necessarily in your own native language (and, to make it worse, possibly explaining what you got to a programmer who doesn't speak that language at all). Oh dear, what a nightmarish thought ... :-?

again, it's something you can overcome, and there definitely needs to be a language standardisation: let's face it, you wanna work on an international level? You need English (and/or foreign language skills!)

[csThor]

In Russia that may not be the case, yet. Reading in between the lines I get the impression that the new Maddox Games team is more of a collection of people without too much international experience (or none at all).

[bongodriver]

lol it's a saddening image, but I wonder if it's all part of some sort of secret agenda, or maybe there actually are thousands of people out there that felt they got ripped off and moved over.

Most of us feel we actually got a bit less than we paid for (this happens all the time), but only a very small minority wan't to punish 1C for the rest of their lives, Bewolf was spot-on with 'entitlement junkies'.

Thousands? I doubt it, secret agenda? more like it but the secret part isn't so secret, it's clear they wan't COD and probably 1C to fail, why? god only knows.

[RCAF_FB_Orville]

Thanks for the update.....but more so the lulz at this thread. All we are saying.....Is give peace a chance. :grin:

Flight sim forum discussions always remind me of this 'The Day Today' satirical sketch....where WAR is invoked out of an entirely peaceful accord. :grin:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3BO6GP9NMY

Very passionate bunch aren't we. Remember that we are all really on the same side.....deep down inside. :-)

Carry on. I'll have a look back in next week. :grin:

[Tickl3]

The issue is that people harp on about it, whenever appropriate and especially when not. I, for example, am not particularly happy with the state of things but I have better things to do than spend my time throwing tantrums on message boards. Simply put I shelved the game for the time being and don't expect any "enjoyment" for the forseeable future. I have other hobbies I can waste my freetime on and I don't really understand where the need to throw a tantrum on what is essentially a 50€ piece of software.

Voicing an opinion is not throwing a tantrum.
And spending 2 minutes posting on a thread hardly means that someone has no hobbies or life outside of those 2 minutes. Interesting opinion.
I too shelved the game but the thing thats frustrating is that they have basically dropped it, without finishing it. Thats what has annoyed a lot of people.
Oh and dont forget that £40 may not be a lot to you but it is to others.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Clearly a lot of trolls who have no idea about CAD, open yours eyes and realise RoF has nothing on CoD models... Why you ask well just look at a ww1 aircraft and compare it to a ww2 aircraft there is simply much much more to be modelled.. But hey ignorance is supposed to be bliss right so just carry on trolling.+1

[csThor]

Voicing an opinion is not throwing a tantrum.
And spending 2 minutes posting on a thread hardly means that someone has no hobbies or life outside of those 2 minutes. Interesting opinion.
I too shelved the game but the thing thats frustrating is that they have basically dropped it, without finishing it. Thats what has annoyed a lot of people.
Oh and dont forget that £40 may not be a lot to you but it is to others.

That wasn't specifically aimed at you, but when reading some of the "rather negative" (;)) posts I do get the impression of little kids who didn't get their candy and are now constantly yammering "Where's my candy?". It's nothing personal and I can understand the disappointment, but I can't see the reason for degenerating into pre-puberty behavior when it comes to the state of CloD, the kind of news or the lack of it. Maybe it is a character thing ...

[Ploughman]

Ha, love the I-16. That thing's a blast to fly, if a little slow, but nimble. I look forward to getting BoM'd. Thanks for the update, hope the next patch is soon as I need all the FPS I can get. R!

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Thanks Blacksix and Luthier for the update.

A word to those finding fault, I'm not normally that bothered about people expressing their opinions, but after what is a very decent update with an in-depth report from Luthier on the difficulties they are encountering I'm amazed to find people throwing it back in his face. All you armchair software development experts who think you personally know better...! Take a look at yourselves.+1

[Qpassa]

+1
+2

[carguy_]

Voicing an opinion is not throwing a tantrum.
And spending 2 minutes posting on a thread hardly means that someone has no hobbies or life outside of those 2 minutes. Interesting opinion.
I too shelved the game but the thing thats frustrating is that they have basically dropped it, without finishing it. Thats what has annoyed a lot of people.
Oh and dont forget that £40 may not be a lot to you but it is to others.
Dropped it? Nope. Not true.

Troll post reported.

[addman]

The issue is that people harp on about it, whenever appropriate and especially when not. I, for example, am not particularly happy with the state of things but I have better things to do than spend my time throwing tantrums on message boards. Simply put I shelved the game for the time being and don't expect any "enjoyment" for the forseeable future. I have other hobbies I can waste my freetime on and I don't really understand where the need to throw a tantrum on what is essentially a 50€ piece of software.

I have done the exact same thing and I agree completely. Crap! I couldn't resist commenting, oh well this will be the last one.:)

[Tickl3]

+2

If someone who has no knowledge of the forums or the game goes into a shop and purchases CLOD. They then get home and try to play the game but it keeps on crashing. What are they supposed to think?

To say that what took 1 month previously now takes 12 months either means the people creating the game either dont know what they are doing or how to use the software or that the software is outdated and bisically no longer has the ability to be used to create the title they are trying to create.
You dont start something you have no idea you could even finish.

Whats going to happen when the next release is half finished and unplayable?
Are there any gaurantees that the next game wont be the same as Clod?

[5./JG27.Farber]

Is the I16 going to have a painted gunsight rather than a Gyro reflector gunsight?

It would be nice to see those kinds of attention to detail.

I also have read russian radios were very poor and often removed to save weight as they were genrally useless.

[Tickl3]

Dropped it? Nope. Not true.

Troll post reported.

Read it again. It says BASICALLY dropped it.
Once again, having an opinion is not trolling.
Just because you disagree with what i say that means i should be banned or have my posts deleted? Isnt that the whole meaning of a forum? To discuss things and express opinions?

[Baron]

I'm using a 560ti. Spends most of its time running Battlefield 3 maxed out just fine. .



LoL, no u dont.

[klem]

226 posts in 10 hours, most of it OT drivel.

How are we to find sensible questions and answers that are OT?

For god's sake lock the thread, BlackSix isn't likely to post anything more here that wouldn't be buried within two hours.

[BaronBonBaron]

Thanks Blacksix and Luthier for the update.

A word to those finding fault, I'm not normally that bothered about people expressing their opinions, but after what is a very decent update with an in-depth report from Luthier on the difficulties they are encountering I'm amazed to find people throwing it back in his face. All you armchair software development experts who think you personally know better...! Take a look at yourselves.

+3!

[Urufu_Shinjiro]

Read it again. It says BASICALLY dropped it.
Once again, having an opinion is not trolling.
Just because you disagree with what i say that means i should be banned or have my posts deleted? Isnt that the whole meaning of a forum? To discuss things and express opinions?

Hmm, I guess I missed it the first read through, but going back and looking again I think I do see where the project is dropped, it says it right here:

So our general status report is very simple. Everyone is working very hard doing the same thing they were doing a month or a year ago. Graphical programmers are working on graphics. Network programmers are combing through the network code. Plane modelers are building 3D models of aircraft. No one stopped. Nothing was abandoned. On the contrary, the team continues to grow.


Oh...wait... :roll:

[bongodriver]

Read it again. It says BASICALLY dropped it.
Once again, having an opinion is not trolling.
Just because you disagree with what i say that means i should be banned or have my posts deleted? Isnt that the whole meaning of a forum? To discuss things and express opinions?

Yes that's what a forum is for, so you expressed your oppinion and others expressed their oppinion on it, this just seems to turn people like you into bile spitting looneys who take things a step too far.

[BigC208]

B6, Thanks for the update. Keep us in the loop. When it's done it's done.

[phoenix1963]

It’s our pleasure to continue our weekly updates in 2012!
....
So we address each issue at its own speed. Some bugs can be fixed very quickly, and they are. We can update a cockpit lever animation or fix a type in a matter of minutes. On the other hand, locating a memory leak can take many long months of dedicated work by some extremely qualified programmers. All bugs are not created equal.
[/FONT][/B]

I sympathise. It once took me 6 months to find a stack overflow that was writing over data belonging to another processor.

Some of the people here simply don't understand.

Looking forward to the patch.

56RAF_phoenix

[J.Reb]

Most of us feel we actually got a bit less than we paid for (this happens all the time), but only a very small minority wan't to punish 1C for the rest of their lives, Bewolf was spot-on with 'entitlement junkies'.

The only entitlement people want is for the game to work correctly. And it is due to them because they bought the game in good faith with money they worked for. What part of this don't you understand?


Thousands? I doubt it, secret agenda? more like it but the secret part isn't so secret, it's clear they wan't COD and probably 1C to fail, why? god only knows.

Pretty stupid thing to say. I have bought everything Oleg has come out with, and wound up satisfied because he released necessary patches. I hope CoD will wind up the same.

[JG53Frankyboy]

Hmm, I guess I missed it the first read through, but going back and looking again I think I do see where the project is dropped, it says it right here:



Oh...wait... :roll:

according to Luthier ( a post in the past) they abondened the Battle of Britain scenario. No totaly new planes/cockpits, no ships for it.
I hope the RAF and RA planes wil get their FM and CEM corrections (the Lw planes are needed in thevBoM scenario ;) ).
From Engine and GUI improvements both scenarios will get benefit - at least that is my understanding of 1C's development plan.

[bongodriver]

The only entitlement people want is for the game to work correctly. And it is due to them because they bought the game in good faith with money they worked for. What part of this don't you understand?

What part of the various references to the ongoing work to fix the game don't you understand?


Pretty stupid thing to say. I have bought everything Oleg has come out with, and wound up satisfied because he released necessary patches. I hope CoD will wind up the same.

All the stupid things being said are by the ones claiming work has been 'basically' dropped on COD.

[csThor]

I agree with Franky. The basic engine work continues but the modelling work is concentrated on BoM. Unfortunately, if I may say so ... That means no Royal Navy warship, no further ships for the BoB scenario at all. :(

[BaronBonBaron]

People complain about lack of communication. But really, I think we should be thankful that the devs EVEN TRY TO COMMUNICATE WITH US AT ALL considering all the mud slinging/whining/ungratefulness/flaming ect. that is directed at them CONSTANTLY when they're clearly working very hard for the series. Maybe if we were more respectful, they would WANT to talk with us and keep us updated.



Also, people who talk like:
"This sim is broked it will never be fixed!!!!11! WWaaww waaww. I'll never buy the sequelz!!!11! NevER!!!1 I'm so pissed!"

You CAN leave you know, you don't HAVE to buy the sequel.
If you're so mad then why are you still here?
Its people like you are ruining this forum and the Friday Updates for everybody else.

EDIT: Thanks for the update! :)

[Mango]

While I can't deny that CloD is a mess and gives me no joy, the whining is like from small children who cannot accept reality.

Trivializing memory leaks and how soon it should be fixed shows you have no clue. The factory analogy is just thick... there is no "chain of production" when you're writing software.

Rant over, let me say "well put, Luthier". I have no love for the current product but I believe you and your team are doing your best to make it right. This I-16 pictures bring back some great memories!

[moilami]

Wow, thanks of the update. The Rata is loads of fun to fly (or to shoot down) :D

[Houndstone Hawk]

Just come back to the forums to check in what I had purchased back at release only to find an update on pics for something that appears non-clod related. I'd purchased the box set aswell a digital copy in the hope of LAN use & it is still near completely unplayable in Single player. (And as for LAN, it has never once worked for us).
So ..... Am I to believe that my patient waiting was in vain? Has CloD & it's plans of new ideas & rectifications been shelved? :(

[klem]

Just come back to the forums to check in what I had purchased back at release only to find an update on pics for something that appears non-clod related. I'd purchased the box set aswell a digital copy in the hope of LAN use & it is still near completely unplayable in Single player. (And as for LAN, it has never once worked for us).
So ..... Am I to believe that my patient waiting was in vain? Has CloD & it's plans of new ideas & rectifications been shelved? :(

Did you read the original post?

[Baron]

Now i remember why i left.


Thx B6 and Luthier for the update and i truly hope u dont post another one, ever.

Then "they" really have something to whine about.

[bongodriver]

Just come back to the forums to check in what I had purchased back at release only to find an update on pics for something that appears non-clod related. I'd purchased the box set aswell a digital copy in the hope of LAN use & it is still near completely unplayable in Single player. (And as for LAN, it has never once worked for us).
So ..... Am I to believe that my patient waiting was in vain? Has CloD & it's plans of new ideas & rectifications been shelved? :(

If you read the first post the answer is there, the pretty pictures are just a bonus showing us some stuff that's going to happen in the sequel.

[RazzyMan]

B6, thanks for the feedback. Sounds Great! and well explained.
Just thought I'd let you know I realy enjoy the Il2 COD in its current state (in fact all Il2 offerings so far) and look forward to any improvements and expansions into the future.

By the way, if a Avro Lancaster could find its way into a future project then I would be even happier!!

Best wishes!



Quad core. 2.8 GHz + slight OC
6GB DDR3 RAM
GTX 560 Ti + OC to 1.1GHz
Win 7 64bit

[merlin1]

People complain about lack of communication. But really, I think we should be thankful that the devs EVEN TRY TO COMMUNICATE WITH US AT ALL considering all the mud slinging/whining/ungratefulness/flaming ect. that is directed at them CONSTANTLY when they're clearly working very hard for the series. Maybe if we were more respectful, they would WANT to talk with us and keep us updated.



Also, people who talk like:
"This sim is broked it will never be fixed!!!!11! WWaaww waaww. I'll never buy the sequelz!!!11! NevER!!!1 I'm so pissed!"

You CAN leave you know, you don't HAVE to buy the sequel.
If you're so mad then why are you still here?
Its people like you are ruining this forum and the Friday Updates for everybody else.

EDIT: Thanks for the update! :)




They sold me a broken game.

:evil:

[bongodriver]

They sold me a broken game.

:evil:

So let them fix it....

[Tickl3]

So let them fix it....

Thats not how its meant to work im afraid.
You dont buy something only to find out its broken and wait months or years for it to be fixed. What planet are you on?

[6S.Tamat]

Thanks for the update. I was shooting down a 110 on ATAG when I heard about the update on teamspeak - great fun and a nice explosion too.

Don't think that the loudest speak for the majority. Looking forward to the patch and the sequel.
that's true, the majority stopped to think about Cod and returned to Il2.

[Baron]

Thats not how its meant to work im afraid.
You dont buy something only to find out its broken and wait months or years for it to be fixed. What planet are you on?



Think about it for a day or two. Then come back here and present a solution to the problem.


Im on the edge of my seat until then.


Thx.

[bongodriver]

Thats not how its meant to work im afraid.
You dont buy something only to find out its broken and wait months or years for it to be fixed. What planet are you on?

The same planet that was sold a broken iPhone....not the planet that the Beagle mars probe was sent to.

[merlin1]

Thats not how its meant to work im afraid.
You dont buy something only to find out its broken and wait months or years for it to be fixed. What planet are you on?


Thats true.
Such sale is pure hoax.

:evil::evil:

[Force10]

I guess we should all be grateful that they didn't announce that they are already working on a sequel for the Battle of Moscow. I'm not sure about mentioning that planes take a year to make because the planes for COD have been completed for quite sometime. Folks are not really all up in arms that they aren't releasing new planes constantly, they just wan't the existing planes to work with the game code.

[JG53_Valantine]

Becoming worse than the Zoo here - and is this update thread the appropriate place for all of this bickering?

Whilst all the announcement is great my only gripe is that we are still left with the launcher.exe crashes at present, I hope that the fixes get released soon as it is starting to become a real barrier to organised groups enjoying this game with teamwork based missions in mind.

Back onto the postive side - the update was ontime and showed that the devs understand they didn't originally appreciate how long things took but are now in a bette rposition to give more reasonable evaluations of their time to compelte things - hopefully this is the start of them using a more realistic timeline.
Looking forward to future udpates and patches - and of course Battle of Moscow as that Rata will make a lovely target! - Can't wait to see some of that internal structure getting ripped apart in game!
V

[Flanker35M]

S!

First of all I would not compare RoF and CoD in ANY way as they both represent totally different time frames and business model and whatever. Also both Jason and Luthier have said they are friends thus see it far better than any of us here what the situation is :) I enjoy RoF for being the best WW1 sim out there at the moment, runs nicely and looks good. Invested to get all the planes and a heap of field modifications. I enjoy the offline career of RoF, I laugh flying around in those lawnmowers and shooting with the BB guns :D So RoF delivers, at least for me.

CoD is WW2 and a different beast. Sure has it's flaws and all, but hopefully some day at it's deserved place as king of the hill in WW2 simulation. I get enjoyment to a degree out of CoD too, for example the occasional ATAG runs etc. Also bug hunt can be fun, more productive to post them than ride the Whambulance all over the forums :D A lot of work and time is needed to it before that, but I can wait :) AS csThor said, there is a lot to do outside the computer world :D

I understand fully the frustrations, even anger, floating around here. Arguments and counter arguments are thrown. Some good some not, but that is natural in a jungle like internet where everyone is just a name on the screen. I bet face to face with Luthier & Team the tone would be far from aggressive or abusing..think of that before posting. I am sure devs are under heaps of pressure already as they work on 2 fronts..CoD and BoM. But the most important thing is that they STILL work on the title. AS long there is progress there is hope..maybe bigger leaps or smaller steps, even steps back, but yet work.

So..I am glad that BlackSix posted the update and we will get more of them in future. Meanwhile we can fill our time with other activities if CoD is not THE THING for you..yet ;)

Over and out, have a nice weekend ALL!

[bongodriver]

You forgot...:grin:

Is hoax this method of selling ?...............oh hell yes

Hoax? it would be a Hoax if we got a potato instead of a game, I understand english might not be your first language.

Most people got the software they wanted, it just needs fixing, I am amazed at the things people complain about, I have had plenty of games in my time that didn't run well on release, crashed all the time, they needed loads of patching, COD doesn't sound like the biggest offender in history at all.

[6BL Bird-Dog]

To Black Six & Luthier,
Many thanks for the information on the problems the team are facing at present and enlightening us as to why it has taken ,and will take more time still.The additional complexity of the new product over the il2 1946 series is now more understandable.I am glad to hear the BoM release will be merged with CloD ,this also makes it clear that the existing known issues with the present release wiil be fixed before any seqel .
Fellow forum Members
In the past as others do I have vented my views about the state of the release::-x & understand why some forum mebers feel frustrated.
I am now looking foreward to the eventual rectification and resulting patch(s).
I belive now would be a good time to put it behind us and be more positive about the games future as any further venting is only repeating what many others ,including me, have already said again & again & again &..........:rolleyes:
Were not there yet but closer than we were before:-)
PS:Luthier
Please look it no a better Coop Gui as a lot of members would like this changed.;)

[Cobra8472]

For those of you doubting the 1 year / aircraft timeframe;

I've been working with FS aircraft for the past 4 years-- and worked with dozens of payware companies.

Generally, an aircraft is pushed out in ~3 months, and can easily take up to 4-6. Tubeliners for FS take even longer (systems coding is not easy).

Note, that this is with a full dedicated team, working one ONE aircraft-- for an already established sim with well-documented features.

However, we have the added advantage of not worrying about; damage models, LoD's, damage states, components, 100% accurate collision boxes, etc, all of which are incredibly important in CloD

It is completely reasonable to use at least 6-8 months per aircraft in development then + testing it and making sure it flies according to specs.

[JG53_Valantine]

@ Force10 - A game I waited and waited for nearly 10 years to arrive - Stalker Shadow of Chernobyl - I bought a whole new system with Windows Vista for it only to find the exe crashed within seconds of launch on vista until the first patch - by which time several friends had ruined the story for me!

Rise of flight wasn't too great at launch either and took a year to be patched to a decent stage.

Eitehr way though, comparing CloD now to CloD at launch and it ahs come a hell of a long way and promises to continue to grow and bring us all new things!
V

[McHilt]

Maybe a nice pic will bring this thread a bit more ON topic... let's hope so

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e35/Aukieboy/rata.jpg

[merlin1]

Hoax? it would be a Hoax if we got a potato instead of a game, I understand english might not be your first language.

Most people got the software they wanted, it just needs fixing, I am amazed at the things people complain about, I have had plenty of games in my time that didn't run well on release, crashed all the time, they needed loads of patching, COD doesn't sound like the biggest offender in history at all.


Yes, English in not my first language. And yes, you understand me perfectly what I want to say.

:mad:

[slm]

Nice Rata. Release the patch when it's ready...

[ACE-OF-ACES]

For those of you doubting the 1 year / aircraft timeframe;

I've been working with FS aircraft for the past 4 years-- and worked with dozens of payware companies.

Generally, an aircraft is pushed out in ~3 months, and can easily take up to 4-6. Tubeliners for FS take even longer (systems coding is not easy).

Note, that this is with a full dedicated team, working one ONE aircraft-- for an already established sim with well-documented features.

However, we have the added advantage of not worrying about; damage models, LoD's, damage states, components, 100% accurate collision boxes, etc, all of which are incredibly important in CloD

It is completely reasonable to use at least 6-8 months per aircraft in development then + testing it and making sure it flies according to specs.
Cobra

Brace yourself to be called a liar or worse..

Why?

Because self proclaimed experts who have never done any of this type of work have already spoken and determined that it does not take that long to do. And the only way it could take that long is if 'you' are

1) a liar
2) not managing your team very well
3) stupid
4) all of the above

Just a little heads up!

But I not being one of those do want to thank you for providing some insite as to how much effort does go into doing what you do! S!

[bongodriver]

Would you care to name another flight sim or game that was in development for 7 years and was released in worse shape? I didn't think so...

did you really just pre-empt your answer 'before' I replied?

By rights any game that ever had a patch was broken to some extent, yes 7 years development obviously wasn't enough time but I guess UBI put the screw down on them to release and the public were getting anxious.

[kalimba]

Hoax? it would be a Hoax if we got a potato instead of a game, I understand english might not be your first language.

Most people got the software they wanted, it just needs fixing, I am amazed at the things people complain about, I have had plenty of games in my time that didn't run well on release, crashed all the time, they needed loads of patching, COD doesn't sound like the biggest offender in history at all.

You know, in Quebec, many years ago the Goverment passed a legislation
forbiding any kind of TV advertising aimed at kids...No more raging heartpounding ads with planes and cars flying around like magic....They were not hoax...They were called: misrepresentative of the real attributes of a specific toy...Therefore causing a loooooooooooooooooots of disapointements, crying and whining, even though the Parents paid big money for those toys.
The Makers like Hasbro , Mattel and all the others opposed this law by stating that they were just showing what could be done in certain situations, and with lots of illegal pills of course. But the fact is, even though kids are whiners by nature, and uneducated young brats for many of them, the court ruled that you just cant advertise a product that wont do what is ''promised'' by the understanding of this particuliar clientele. Even if it is obvious for a grown and intelligent average person.

;)

[Ataros]

Originally Posted by Ataros View Post
You and other complainers must have a different game version than this guy has. This is real online gameplay footage on ATAG server that proves that the game is in a playable condition with recent patches installed via Steam (unless you have a pirated version).
http://www.youtube.com/user/Semashko27/videos
If someone states the opposite please provide a proof as solid and evident as this one.
Are you kidding me? those videos have some preatty bad stutteting. not as bad as mine, but enough to be considered "bad gameplay". i was expecting that kind of stutteirng in a mid/low range pc like mine. not in a top gen pc like mr X has.

No kidding. These videos prove that the game is in a playable condition unlike some others say. He would not play online 4-6 days a week if the game would not be playable.

"Not in a playable condition" and "stutteting enough to be considered "bad gameplay"" are different things aren't they?

Then even if it is a "bad gameplay" for you at the same time it is not a "bad gameplay" for 2000+ people listed on the ATAG statistics page http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/content.php
All these people are not forced or paid to play there and do so only because they have "good gameplay" and therefore not shelved the game.

These are 2 links to some factual proof. People who emotionally complain here do not need any facts they need to share emotions to feel better. I can perfectly understand their frustration and feeling pity if their PC can handle only 2+ years old RoF and ArmA2 (speaking of sims) or low-detail/low-visibility distance/small maps BF3 which is console oriented in the 1st place. But I can not understand why they are too lazy to optimise their systems (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=254014&postcount=13) (or upgrade if absolutely necessary - 2.6GHz is no go btw) to go online and have the same fun now while the devs are slowly working on patches.

However I just had an idea why it happens. I guess the "old men" from Il-2 time became too mature to go through all this system optimisation, etc. which they did 10 years ago (I was flying in 16bit(!) colour 1024x960 with mip-map and texture settings on low in drivers to get 25-35 fps lol. Anyone remembers that there was 16bit colour setting in Il-2 instead of normal 32bit? :) ) The younger audience is not prepared to put any effort into their system often too as they got used to consoles. They will never know how much fun it was to make MSFS run without stutters 10 or 7 years ago form a RAM-Drive )) Tweaking was always needed with sims: Warbirds, MSFS, Il-2, ArmA1, ArmA2, RoF on release date, etc., etc., and the reason is usually a huge visibility distance multiplied by details level.

I hope moderators will continue their good job of separating facts from emotions and lies. The latest is prohibited by forum rules btw :)

[pencon]

Just for the record , the word is WHINING not Whinging , and theres a lot of it going on here ... Luthier should create a tiny violin that plays during the updates just for those people . Look , it's 50 bucks ok ? It ain't like you paid countless thousands !The sim plays fine and quite smooth on my GTX570 nvidia .Maybe my 16GB of ram are helping out a bit .

[StkNRdr]

BlackSix:
...nothing good ever comes out of talking about it before it is ready.

Hear, hear...

[pupo162]

No kidding. These videos prove that the game is in a playable condition unlike some others say. He would not play online 4-6 days a week if the game would not be playable.

"Not in a playable condition" and "stutteting enough to be considered "bad gameplay"" are different things aren't they?

Then even if it is a "bad gameplay" for you at the same time it is not a "bad gameplay" for 2000+ people listed on the ATAG statistics page http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/content.php
All these people are not forced or paid to play there and do so only because they have "good gameplay" and therefore not shelved the game.

These are 2 links to some factual proof. People who emotionally complain here do not need any facts they need to share emotions to feel better. I can perfectly understand their frustration and feeling pity if their PC can handle only 2+ years old RoF and ArmA2 (speaking of sims) or low-detail/low-visibility distance/small maps BF3 which is console oriented in the 1st place. But I can not understand why they are too lazy to optimise their systems (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=254014&postcount=13) (or upgrade if absolutely necessary - 2.6GHz is no go btw) to go online and have the same fun now while the devs are slowly working on patches.

However I just had an idea why it happens. I guess the "old men" from Il-2 time became too mature to go through all this system optimisation, etc. which they did 10 years ago (I was flying in 16bit(!) colour 1024x960 with mip-map and texture settings on low in drivers to get 25-35 fps lol. Anyone remembers that there was 16bit colour setting in Il-2 instead of normal 32bit? :) ) The younger audience is not prepared to put any effort into their system often too as they got used to consoles. They will never know how much fun it was to make MSFS run without stutters 10 or 7 years ago form a RAM-Drive )) Tweaking was always needed with sims: Warbirds, MSFS, Il-2, ArmA1, ArmA2, RoF on release date, etc., etc., and the reason is usually a huge visibility distance multiplied by details level.

I hope moderators will continue their good job of separating facts from emotions and lies. The latest is prohibited by forum rules btw :)


to end discussion on that matter, i had a friend who asked me this christmas to make him a pc. he ended up buying a 2500k 8 gb ddr3 16000hz and one 560Ti, in exchange i was given the right to de-virginize his hard drive with il-2 COD. tha pathetic performance who came form that pc. wich for me high budget, pretty much left very clear that the problem is not on my pc. On the other hand bf3 " a game made for consoles" actually was pretty playable, guess what both have in common? they both say in the box that these pc should work.

[Bricks]

:-|

Nothing new on the western front.

[nakedsquirrel]

Great update. Well put!

And I can't wait to die a horrible, flaming death in one of those I-16's

[pencon]

Just wondering if there'll be an MC200 to keep the Fiat G50 company some day .. ?

[ATAG_Dutch]

upgrade if absolutely necessary - 2.6GHz is no go btw

2500k 8 gb ddr3 16000hz and one 560Ti, in exchange i was given the right to de-virginize his hard drive with il-2 COD. tha pathetic performance who came form that pc. wich for me high budget, pretty much left very clear that the problem is not on my pc.

Just so you both know, my set-up runs the game fine with all settings very high offline. I have to lower the buildings detail for London. I previously had a 5770 which was also fine, but only on medium settings, and London was a no- fly zone.

For multiplayer I lower the settings to High all round and have no more problems than the chaps with top of the range gaming pc's, so you don't have to upgrade very far to have a very playable experience.

Back to topic - The I-16 looks fantastic, and brings back very pleasurable memories, so I've changed my mind and am now very much looking forward to the sequel.

Thanks for the update B6. :)

[Dano]

to end discussion on that matter, i had a friend who asked me this christmas to make him a pc. he ended up buying a 2500k 8 gb ddr3 16000hz and one 560Ti, in exchange i was given the right to de-virginize his hard drive with il-2 COD. tha pathetic performance who came form that pc. wich for me high budget, pretty much left very clear that the problem is not on my pc. On the other hand bf3 " a game made for consoles" actually was pretty playable, guess what both have in common? they both say in the box that these pc should work.

Funny, my system seems to play it quite well.

[philip.ed]

Offensive comment.

Post reported.

Please be serious.

This place has become a playground. I better sign up for the thought police before I'm snuffed.

[pupo162]

Funny, my system seems to play it quite well.

im pretty sure even the motherboard he has his the same as yours. FPS wise it was good, over 50. but the stuttering rendered it unplayable. every time you clsoed in a plane the game stuttered.

[Dano]

im pretty sure even the motherboard he has his the same as yours. FPS wise it was good, over 50. but the stuttering rendered it unplayable. every time you clsoed in a plane the game stuttered.

That was fixed ages ago.

[pupo162]

That was fixed ages ago.

no. this was tested the 22nd of december. and i still have htis problems. i could make a video..... oh wait, fraps doenst work with clod.... probably a safety measure.

[JG53_Valantine]

Pupo - you need the latest version of fraps which runs absolutely fine, the old ones don't run in CloD just like they don't run in some other newer games.
V

[LcSummers]

Thanks B6 and Luthier for this update.

Very nice that little Rata. Keep up this good work. Now its much clearer for me.

Great!!!:-P

[Dano]

no. this was tested the 22nd of december. and i still have htis problems. i could make a video..... oh wait, fraps doenst work with clod.... probably a safety measure.

Doesn't happen on my system, positive you are running the latest version?

[NervousEnergy]

That I-16 amazes me. Not the model, which I expect to be a well done work of graphics, but the plane itself. Men (and perhaps a few women... Litvak comes to mind) took that thing up against Bf 109's???

Bravery beyond compare.

Edit: On performance, the game has run fine for me well before the latest patch. Fairly beefy system... i5 750 at 3.6ghz, NV 570, 8 GB RAM, SB X-fi, but hardly super state of the art. If you haven't turned down texture size from Original to at least High (or even Medium), then you need to unless you've got over 1.5 GB available VRAM. I've found the texture slider to be more important than the resolution in terms of smooth play.

[Al Schlageter]

That I-16 amazes me. Not the model, which I expect to be a well done work of graphics, but the plane itself. Men (and perhaps a few women... Litvak comes to mind) took that thing up against Bf 109's???

Bravery beyond compare.

Lydia Vladimirovna Litvyak flew Yak-1s.

[Ataros]

to end discussion on that matter, i had a friend who asked me this christmas to make him a pc. he ended up buying a 2500k 8 gb ddr3 16000hz and one 560Ti, in exchange i was given the right to de-virginize his hard drive with il-2 COD. tha pathetic performance who came form that pc. wich for me high budget, pretty much left very clear that the problem is not on my pc. On the other hand bf3 " a game made for consoles" actually was pretty playable, guess what both have in common? they both say in the box that these pc should work.

Well, if this is the case than the game will never 'work' for you as it will never work for Tvrdi, Furbs, Tree and a few others.

I think that this game is not for everyone. E.g. I gave up on MSFS when could not figure out all the controls settings and make it work without stutters. It is fine. And it was my own choice.

Due to its complexity this diamond will never be 100% polished. It would be naive to expect it. Games that do not have this much ambitions in complexity and details (e.g. BF3, WoT, World of Planes) may better suit players who are not prepared to put efforts into fine-tuning, testing, tweaking, etc. Buying a new PC is not everything ;) I am happy with 35-45 fps, no stutters on my ancient HD4890-2gb. You can not seriously demand more from this card/game combination now.

CloD is 2013 game pushed by someone to be published to early and will run just fine without extensive tweaking on 2013 hardware.

BTW. The box was published by UBI. You can ask them on their forums why their marketing people always put those system requirements on boxes: min - just to start the game and make screenshots, recommended - to play offline only @20 fps with low-med setings. Marketing has nothing to do with development. This is developers forums, not UBI.

[klem]

to end discussion on that matter, i had a friend who asked me this christmas to make him a pc. he ended up buying a 2500k 8 gb ddr3 16000hz and one 560Ti, in exchange i was given the right to de-virginize his hard drive with il-2 COD. tha pathetic performance who came form that pc. wich for me high budget, pretty much left very clear that the problem is not on my pc. On the other hand bf3 " a game made for consoles" actually was pretty playable, guess what both have in common? they both say in the box that these pc should work.

Hopefully a constructive post.....

That rig should run it just fine. Some background, I expect the 560Ti is a 1Gb card which is about minimum for this game but should run it ok at Medium settings with possibly a few downward tweaks in some areas. Please don't quote minimum specs from the box because we know at this time they don't deliver much if at all and as far as very high settings are concerned 1C declared a long time ago it would be a very high/futuristic spec PC that could run it all out. Also bear in mind that medium settings in this game compare very well wth the old IL-2.

Presumably you ensured that any antivirus was set to 'allow', e.g. not scan, files from the game folders when they were opened. And any other 'utilities' that would interfere with gameplay were stopped or set to 'allow' gameplay. Things like Windows/other update facilities turned off, etc.

So, what antivirus/firewall is he running and how is it set to accommodate gaming?

You don't give three vital pieces of information:-

Screen resolution
Detailed Game settings
Nvidia control panel settings used in the game (either default or for Launcher.exe if you created a game profile for it)

These would be helpful.

[Force10]

I am a little concerned that we haven't heard mention of the AI being addressed. The misconception from a lot of folks here is that people that are "whining" are having performance issues. Other than CTD's, the game runs smooth for me but being an offline player I am really hoping they are working AI etc.

[bongodriver]

I am a little concerned that we haven't heard mention of the AI being addressed. The misconception from a lot of folks here is that people that are "whining" are having performance issues. Other than CTD's, the game runs smooth for me but being an offline player I am really hoping they are working AI etc.

They said in an earlyer update it's being worked on, you might have also noticed a thread opened speciffically asking for community input on AI issues.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=28747

[pupo162]

Hopefully a constructive post.....


You don't give three vital pieces of information:-

Screen resolution
Detailed Game settings
Nvidia control panel settings used in the game (either default or for Launcher.exe if you created a game profile for it)

These would be helpful.

as i said, the pc was de-virginized with Clod. so it had nvidea drivers and COD installed. not even anti virus.

it was 1080p wich is todays standard.

detail game settings, i started with full graphics ( wich was utopian even i recognize that), and downgraded all the way to my settings wich are the minimum effective settings ( as you may know some settings if put to low cause more stuttering than otherway around)

default nvidea settings.

[tomandre81]

Not to sound like a bitch, but I couldnt care less for a sequel. Why dont you use all your teams to focus finishing cliffs of dover and making it into one of the best ww2 sims ever? Dynamic campaign, good A.I, no stuttering, more realistic colors and shadows, fixing the radio. Red Baron 3d has an amazing dynamic campaign, why cant that be recreated?

[Dano]

Not to sound like a bitch, but I couldnt care less for a sequel. Why dont you use all your teams to focus finishing cliffs of dover and making it into one of the best ww2 sims ever? Dynamic campaign, good A.I, no stuttering, more realistic colors and shadows, fixing the radio. Red Baron 3d has an amazing dynamic campaign, why cant that be recreated?

Simply put, finances.

[Dano]

as i said, the pc was de-virginized with Clod. so it had nvidea drivers and COD installed. not even anti virus.

it was 1080p wich is todays standard.

detail game settings, i started with full graphics ( wich was utopian even i recognize that), and downgraded all the way to my settings wich are the minimum effective settings ( as you may know some settings if put to low cause more stuttering than otherway around)

default nvidea settings.

Apart from when I get involved with clouds, ground dust or any other bugged particle effect my system can quite happily run it at almost full switch but I do run 1680*1050 so that will be helping. My actual settings are everything maxed with SSAO, VSync and Epilepsy filter off and I average 44fps (I was averaging 57fps until a few patches back) on Black Death. I have no issues with stutter closing in on enemy aircraft whatsoever even though I'm pushing the settings too high for my gfx card.

[jg27_mc]

Thank you for the update.

I am a bit o whiner myself... but this crap reached a level where I am all feed up about some of the reposes in this forum.

Button line is that yes, we were kinda cheated... Yes, they have done wrong to launch an unfinished product thinking they would be able to solve the problems/bugs in a useful time line. But all of this is past... Learn to live with it and let the team work!!! Please leave all the whines for the upcoming patches or sequels if things go wrong again...

Regards.

PS: I am so glad I have bought and joined the RoF community... Having a blast flying what a consider to be a state of the art simulation regarding graphics/complexity/performance ratio.

[klem]

as i said, the pc was de-virginized with Clod. so it had nvidea drivers and COD installed. not even anti virus.

it was 1080p wich is todays standard.

detail game settings, i started with full graphics ( wich was utopian even i recognize that), and downgraded all the way to my settings wich are the minimum effective settings ( as you may know some settings if put to low cause more stuttering than otherway around)

default nvidea settings.

OK but that doesn't really help me as I still don't know exactly what the game settings are or what the nvidia default settings are for the 560Ti. Can you post screenshots of these, PM me if you like. The Game settings should have the Custom box checked to show all the settings and the nvidia panel will probably take two screenshots because I expect you'll have to scroll down.

[Sutts]

Not to sound like a bitch, but I couldnt care less for a sequel. Why dont you use all your teams to focus finishing cliffs of dover and making it into one of the best ww2 sims ever? Dynamic campaign, good A.I, no stuttering, more realistic colors and shadows, fixing the radio. Red Baron 3d has an amazing dynamic campaign, why cant that be recreated?

If you buy the sequel, all new features, improvements, objects, aircraft etc. will automatically appear in CloD. So....you will get the best ww2 sim ever but it'll be the combination of 2 products.

1c are also working on patches to improve CloD before the sequel arrives so all is good.:grin:

[Sutts]

same old hypnotised diehard fanboy..I guess you never played CLOD just like your hot brother Aceofaces....soon u will hit hard with ur stubborn and hypnotised head once u realised - nothing from their promises is realized

I thought you'd gone Tvrdi? You said eariler you were leaving the forum. Please. Pretty please. Give us a break for a while won't ya? I can only take so many negative waves in a day you know.

[manfromx]

Thanks for the update.

Even AAA titles don't have 1/2 the complexity outside of geometry rendering and visuals that goes into flight sims of this ambition.

I'll continue to support you as long as you support your products. I'd hate to see this genre die.

[Sternjaeger II]

Cobra

Brace yourself to be called a liar or worse..

Why?

Because self proclaimed experts who have never done any of this type of work have already spoken and determined that it does not take that long to do. And the only way it could take that long is if 'you' are

1) a liar
2) not managing your team very well
3) stupid
4) all of the above

Just a little heads up!

But I not being one of those do want to thank you for providing some insite as to how much effort does go into doing what you do! S!

You just don't want to understand. It's obvious that a one year development for a single aircraft is not a viable way to develop a simulator. Most add-on devs for FS do it on their spare time and do not have a professional project management background,so each team or software house has its times.

Maddox Games is a small company, that's why they need a more pro-active and efficient planning. 7+ years of development and an incomplete product are an unequivocal sign of poor line managing.

It's not whining, it's about the freedom of being able to submit constructive criticism to help,cos there are a lot of professionals here that can help,without getting all the hysterical reactions we see here.

Proper whiners are everywhere, and you won't change their attitude by being aggressive towards them,just ignore them and let everyone have their say.

[pupo162]

OK but that doesn't really help me as I still don't know exactly what the game settings are or what the nvidia default settings are for the 560Ti. Can you post screenshots of these, PM me if you like. The Game settings should have the Custom box checked to show all the settings and the nvidia panel will probably take two screenshots because I expect you'll have to scroll down.

no. i cnat send oyu anything. this was a one day test. wont happen again so no point.


pheraps when the next patch comes out i will ask the guy to test again...

thanks for the initiative to try to help, i appreciate it

[Houndstone Hawk]

S!

First of all I would not compare RoF and CoD in ANY way as they both represent totally different time frames and business model and whatever. Also both Jason and Luthier have said they are friends thus see it far better than any of us here what the situation is :) I enjoy RoF for being the best WW1 sim out there at the moment, runs nicely and looks good. Invested to get all the planes and a heap of field modifications. I enjoy the offline career of RoF, I laugh flying around in those lawnmowers and shooting with the BB guns :D So RoF delivers, at least for me.

CoD is WW2 and a different beast. Sure has it's flaws and all, but hopefully some day at it's deserved place as king of the hill in WW2 simulation. I get enjoyment to a degree out of CoD too, for example the occasional ATAG runs etc. Also bug hunt can be fun, more productive to post them than ride the Whambulance all over the forums :D A lot of work and time is needed to it before that, but I can wait :) AS csThor said, there is a lot to do outside the computer world :D

I understand fully the frustrations, even anger, floating around here. Arguments and counter arguments are thrown. Some good some not, but that is natural in a jungle like internet where everyone is just a name on the screen. I bet face to face with Luthier & Team the tone would be far from aggressive or abusing..think of that before posting. I am sure devs are under heaps of pressure already as they work on 2 fronts..CoD and BoM. But the most important thing is that they STILL work on the title. AS long there is progress there is hope..maybe bigger leaps or smaller steps, even steps back, but yet work.

So..I am glad that BlackSix posted the update and we will get more of them in future. Meanwhile we can fill our time with other activities if CoD is not THE THING for you..yet ;)

Over and out, have a nice weekend ALL!

Excellent reply sir. Very level headed & well put. Just wish CloD would run; period & not crash randomly. Before I left the forums, having rolled back, uninstalled, reapeat & sent the then 'luthier' the error reports on more than one occasion & never had a response. As for buying a 2nd copy for LAN; it has NEVER worked.

I left the forums because of the awful, child-like bitching but as a result, am left with copies of a non-playable sim. I was optimistic for a good long while but I'm guessing I'm an unlucky one as ppl obv are getting enjoyment out of a sim that, for me, is great right up to the point to turning it on.

[BadAim]

I didn't waste my time reading past page 4. Same old crap. I'm not sure which is worse; the sniveling or the sniveling about the sniveling.

How many of you guys come here every day or nearly so? Can you guys not read between the lines?

Let me spell it out for you, because Luthier won't say this about his old friend. Oleg failed. He was not able to get Clod to a salable condition in time to save it (in the real world there are deadlines), so they had to sell it like it was. Luthier is the guy who is going rescue IL2 for the future, and I for one believe that he can. (and don't ask me to quantify that, I just have the feeling) So why don't we bitch a little less and support a little more? Shooting the messenger does not change the bloody message!

That said, thank you for doing a thankless and nearly impossible job Black Six. Have a nice big glass of vodka and know that the majority appreciate you. (same for Luthier and team)

[Sternjaeger II]

AoA,we're all entitled to our opinions,you always bring things a notch down for some reason.

Luthier hasn't managed things properly and still isn't,that's my personal opinion,which happens to be backed by FACTS,not TALK.

I'm not saying he's not gonna fix things,but at this pace this new series will never be complete,like they didn't manage to complete IL-2 in 10 years,because all they cared for was adding more planes and leaving vast parts of the sim incomplete or not to a unified standard. It's sad to see this is happening again with the "new managing",and god knows if I hope they're gonna prove me wrong,cos I really think they're incredibly talented,but lacking a serious strategy or vision.

If you can't cope with opinions that differ from yours,maybe it's time yo go out for a breath of fresh air.

[Bewolf]

AoA,we're all entitled to our opinions,you always bring things a notch down for some reason.

Luthier hasn't managed things properly and still isn't,that's my personal opinion,which happens to be backed by FACTS,not TALK.

I'm not saying he's not gonna fix things,but at this pace this new series will never be complete,like they didn't manage to complete IL-2 in 10 years,because all they cared for was adding more planes and leaving vast parts of the sim incomplete or not to a unified standard. It's sad to see this is happening again with the "new managing",and god knows if I hope they're gonna prove me wrong,cos I really think they're incredibly talented,but lacking a serious strategy or vision.

If you can't cope with opinions that differ from yours,maybe it's time yo go out for a breath of fresh air.

And yet IL2 was the best WW2 Sim ever to hit the markets. Maybe you should check your standarts here, Stern, and get a little reality check.

Or even better, as once again you appear to be much better in the know then everybody else, start your own Sim company to make us all happy in regards to WW2 Simming.

[Theshark888]

Maddox Games is a small company, that's why they need a more pro-active and efficient planning. 7+ years of development and an incomplete product are an unequivocal sign of poor line managing.


JACKPOT:grin:

MG needs to define a reasonable amount of development time and work backwards to define the correct amount of complexity in order to come up with a decent schedule. This "seat of the pants" type of development is totally unprofessional and not worthy of a company doing full time work.

Creating a full interior/exterior 3D CAD model showing all internal structure should only take 2 people 3 weeks. Where this other months of work is being done the reader can only guess.

Trying to say that the developers need factory blueprints of every inch of a ww2 aircraft in order to create an internal/external 3D model shows how over engineered and impossible they have made the task. Factory blueprints are actually notoriously unrelaible and inaccurate..they themselves would have so many updates/revisions that you would have a diffucult time matching the prints to an actual aircraft. The aircraft were produced in batches and there could be a wide variance between batches of the aircraft dimensionally, structurally, etc. This does not even take into account the different factories producing the planes-----US and German planes were bad enough and I can't even imagine the differences in Soviet aircraft.

The only way to get "accurate" dimensions of an aircraft would be to physically measure it. The problem with 70 year old aircraft is that they have probably been scrapped together at some point and are actually inaccurate of a typical example. This has come up with examples of aircraft from MG and others making WW2 aircraft models-such as plastic model companies.

Sorry just had to vent about these opinions of accuracy of models and time to create them and a lack of time management.

[speculum jockey]

Wow Soviet aircraft! That will really make Cliffs of Dover a finished game. I guess all the game was missing was the IL-2. . . after all it's in the name. Once we have all these Soviet aircraft then the online campaign in Cliffs of Dover won't suck and we'll be able to play an online mode that isn't 30 people trying to fly as low as they can so they can use that famous "historically correct" tactic of "negative altitude advantage".

Why are people cheering on Battle of Moscow? It gets released, we have another map and some more flyable planes. . . that doesn't make the game we already spend money on fun does it? I bought this game hoping my friends and I could recreate the Battle of Britain online with other like-minded people. All we've got right now is a pathetic dogfight server that feels like the Brits and Germans decided to only fight 30-50 aircraft at a time, within as small a space as possible.

Am I taking crazy pills here and don't know it, or should people be asking for the devs to finish what they started instead of making another 1/2 finished game? Will we ever get an online gameplay mode that isn't just about whoever got the best kill to death ratio? Or are the devs at MG happy with their product's single player and multiplayer aspects being "satisfactory" . . . according to 1994 standards?

[Tiger27]

Wow Soviet aircraft! That will really make Cliffs of Dover a finished game. I guess all the game was missing was the IL-2. . . after all it's in the name. Once we have all these Soviet aircraft then the online campaign in Cliffs of Dover won't suck and we'll be able to play an online mode that isn't 30 people trying to fly as low as they can so they can use that famous "historically correct" tactic of "negative altitude advantage".

Why are people cheering on Battle of Moscow? It gets released, we have another map and some more flyable planes. . . that doesn't make the game we already spend money on fun does it? I bought this game hoping my friends and I could recreate the Battle of Britain online with other like-minded people. All we've got right now is a pathetic dogfight server that feels like the Brits and Germans decided to only fight 30-50 aircraft at a time, within as small a space as possible.

Am I taking crazy pills here and don't know it, or should people be asking for the devs to finish what they started instead of making another 1/2 finished game? Will we ever get an online gameplay mode that isn't just about whoever got the best kill to death ratio? Or are the devs at MG happy with their product's single player and multiplayer aspects being "satisfactory" . . . according to 1994 standards?

Wow did you even read the post, the graphics modellers don't fix the AI, nor do they do the recoding to fix bugs, some of you just seem to ignore what you are being told, if the Devs were happy do you think they would be spending all this time recoding graphics sounds etc to improve multiplayer and single player :confused:

I cant play the game at the moment always crashes, but at least the devs are still working on it, I still hold out hope that they will nail the problems down and get the game up to a level of quality that we saw with Il2, its obvious that this is going to take a while, so I just fly ROF while waiting ;)