Log in

View Full Version : Requesting confirmation that the 1.09 beta patch 'bug thread' is read by the Dev's

Mysticpuma
09-29-2012, 12:44 PM
Currently there are multiple posts giving details of old and newly found bugs in the Beta patch 1.09.

It is pointless posting bugs and reporting them in forum threads or on the bug tracker if the dev's don't even bother to read them.

Can we just have a reply that they are being read so it makes the effort worthwhile?

Cheers, MP

Please feel free to +1 this post. :)
SG1_Lud
09-29-2012, 01:11 PM
+1
ATAG_Snapper
09-29-2012, 01:43 PM
+1
adonys
09-29-2012, 01:55 PM
+1
Trumper
09-29-2012, 01:58 PM
+1000
Tree_UK
09-29-2012, 02:14 PM
+1
pstyle
09-29-2012, 02:25 PM
+1
fruitbat
09-29-2012, 02:39 PM
+1
JG11Raven
09-29-2012, 03:31 PM
+
rslot
09-29-2012, 03:33 PM
+1!
Stirwenn
09-29-2012, 03:46 PM
+1 !
and seriously, do they test their patch ???:confused:
planespotter
09-29-2012, 09:16 PM
1
holdenbj
09-29-2012, 09:48 PM
+1 and bump :grin:
Longbone
09-29-2012, 09:51 PM
+2~
RickRuski
09-29-2012, 10:24 PM
+1

Who did the proof testing before release??
Hood
09-29-2012, 11:12 PM
+1

But will they read this?
smink1701
09-29-2012, 11:43 PM
+1
jimbop
09-30-2012, 12:06 AM
+1, not a difficult request.
NZtyphoon
09-30-2012, 12:13 AM
+1

Until the developers get it right I'm no longer having CLOD on my computer. I'm replacing with A2A's sim...
ATAG_Dutch
09-30-2012, 01:47 AM
Can we just have a reply that they are being read so it makes the effort worthwhile?

I now believe that we are all wasting our time and our effort, and have been since last November.

But +1.

For what it's worth.
ElAurens
09-30-2012, 02:00 AM
I now believe that we are all wasting our time and our effort, and have been since last November.



This is why you have not seen me on the server in ages.

Why bother.
Anders_And
09-30-2012, 02:02 AM
+1
MadTommy
09-30-2012, 06:17 AM
yarp OP

Basically reporting bugs here only helps in the fact that we as a community have a better understanding of how CloD is working or more accurately not working. It does have some use... a small silver lining at least.
Jaws2002
09-30-2012, 07:26 AM
+1

.......


+ something to keep the excitement high: :mrgreen:

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m702xe3fex1qkegsbo1_500.jpg
Basha
09-30-2012, 08:04 AM
+1

and i would give her 1+ also
Flanker35M
09-30-2012, 08:07 AM
S!

Oh dear :) Wake up, come to forums and see perfection :D

+1
CaptainDoggles
09-30-2012, 08:46 AM
+1

Wow, who is that, Jaws?
Kurfürst
09-30-2012, 09:45 AM
+1

Until the developers get it right I'm no longer having CLOD on my computer. I'm replacing with A2A's sim...

Bye then!
JV44Priller
09-30-2012, 10:14 AM
That is the best thread save I've ever seen! lol
Jaws2002
09-30-2012, 03:57 PM
+1

Wow, who is that, Jaws?

No idea. :-P Just some internet Goddess. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/Jaws_18/love.gif
kristorf
09-30-2012, 04:35 PM
I now believe that we are all wasting our time and our effort, and have been since last November.

But +1.

For what it's worth.

Unfortunatally so do I, in fact I think we have been wasting time from the initial release day with 1C/MG having no intention of fixing this game, just taking money for a not wanted BoM.
dougandtoni
09-30-2012, 06:19 PM
+1

Until the developers get it right I'm no longer having CLOD on my computer. I'm replacing with A2A's sim...

That will learn them:-P
raaaid
09-30-2012, 06:32 PM
be carefull what you wish for do you realize the laughs you get in the forum you wouldnt get if the game was perfect?
Viking
09-30-2012, 06:35 PM
See title.
Viking
bulldoguk
09-30-2012, 06:45 PM
+1
Continu0
09-30-2012, 08:55 PM
+1

never seen more agreement on this forum!
Melbourne, FL
09-30-2012, 08:59 PM
+1
MB_Avro_UK
09-30-2012, 09:57 PM
If I was a developer, I wouldn't bother to read this forum.

Don't you whiners realise that Cliffs of Dover is by far the most COMPLEX and I mean most COMPLEX simulator ever launched?? And far,far more COMPLEX than il2 1946,it's progenitor.

Do you want a sim that will be the best and the only sim in town? Really?

Yes it has teething problems. But FFS give, everyone a break!!

Oh, I'm sure this will make no difference to the destructive elements here. But in a year or less, the whiners will have bought all the Sequals.

I rest my case.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro
Flanker35M
09-30-2012, 10:05 PM
S!

Avro, take it like this. If people would not whine I would be concerned ;) Something is done right when people whine. And yes, will dish out money for the sequel.
icarus
09-30-2012, 10:11 PM
Don't you whiners realise that Cliffs of Dover is by far the most COMPLEX and I mean most COMPLEX simulator ever launched??

LOL No its not.:rolleyes:
Vaxxtx
10-01-2012, 04:59 AM
IDon't you whiners realise that Cliffs of Dover is by far the most COMPLEX and I mean most COMPLEX simulator ever launched??

Best Regards,
MB_Avro

Hi, DCS would like a word with you. As does FSX. Steel Beasts also says hi, etc. etc. ....

You can take out FSX (without the combat upgrade) and Steel Beasts if you are talking air combat sims only. But you again are left with DCS, that is so much more complex than CLoD. As well, as in working condition.

Back OT, I agree.
Luno13
10-01-2012, 07:09 AM
Well, all of your fears can be assuaged...Ilya just posted in the main bug thread:

Thank you for your feedback. Working on British engines, distant dots, and others at the moment.

Just a couple of quick points though.

a- Already mentioned, the mixture in the RAF planes. I can't setting before flight, and most of the RAF planes can't start on the ground.

That is working as intended actually.

The fuel tanks in Dover no longer explode when shot

That again is working as intended - finally. I know it was kind of fun to have a giant fuel tank explode when hit by a single round, but that really shouldn't happen. We've gone through most of the ground objects and their damage model, and they should correctly consider material type and wall thickness. You're going to need something bigger than a .303 for those fuel tanks now.
NZtyphoon
10-01-2012, 09:12 AM
That will learn them:-P

It would if everybody refused to buy a defective and undeveloped product; funny how people are called whiners etc because they resent paying good money for a defective product. I guess some people who buy a new car only to find metal filings in the gearbox, a V8 firing on 5 cylinders and nuts loose on the steering rack would just roll over and say "Aw heck, give it time, its the most sophisticated vehicle ever built, the manufacturers will fix the problem." :rolleyes:

Having said the the last couple of posts show there does seem to be something getting through, so I'll stick with it for now.
MACADEMIC
10-01-2012, 09:42 AM
It would if everybody refused to buy a defective and undeveloped product; funny how people are called whiners etc because they resent paying good money for a defective product. I guess some people who buy a new car only to find metal filings in the gearbox, a V8 firing on 5 cylinders and nuts loose on the steering rack would just roll over and say "Aw heck, give it time, its the most sophisticated vehicle ever built, the manufacturers will fix the problem." :rolleyes:

Having said the the last couple of posts show there does seem to be something getting through, so I'll stick with it for now.

The problem is that software products are generally excluded from warranty regulations. In 2009 there was word of a European initiative (http://www.pcr-online.biz/news/read/eu-wants-two-year-software-guarantee/024072) to change that, but haven't heard of progress since. Presently developers can sell (license) software with as many bugs as they like, with little risk to them (except for unhappy customers).

MAC
Pudfark
10-01-2012, 01:19 PM
Read, Honestly Replied to, Fixed if possible/doable. +1
Robert
10-01-2012, 05:18 PM
It would if everybody refused to buy a defective and undeveloped product; funny how people are called whiners etc because they resent paying good money for a defective product. I guess some people who buy a new car only to find metal filings in the gearbox, a V8 firing on 5 cylinders and nuts loose on the steering rack would just roll over and say "Aw heck, give it time, its the most sophisticated vehicle ever built, the manufacturers will fix the problem." :rolleyes:

Having said the the last couple of posts show there does seem to be something getting through, so I'll stick with it for now.

Well, when you compare a $30,000+ vehicle to a $50.00 game, then how do you expect people to react? Your a whiner. Period. Sorry if that comes off harsh, but the compatison really doesn't fit. IMO. I'd love to see how some of the reactions to a defective product that have been displayed in this forum would play out in a car dealer's show room. Please video tape them. I could use a chuckle.

That said.... yes the release was abysmal. Followup with the community was hardly timely. And it took 18 months to get to a point where maybe.... just maybe..... the game can become playable for the majority of players. I don't expect a final patch for maybe three to six months.

On top of that, if it takes BoM to correct CoD, AND dependant on how the development updates go, I'll give the benefit of the doubt to the developers. I won't blindly rush into purchase, but I'm hopefull.

I'm not a jet fighter. I enjoy RoF but I prefer the WW2 arena. Sadly this is our only option for a WW2 sim. It says more about the state of our hobby than it does about a developer. I'm not happy, I'm not grateful, but I have resolved that for now - this is it. It is what it is.
NZtyphoon
10-01-2012, 07:58 PM
Well, when you compare a $30,000+ vehicle to a $50.00 game, then how do you expect people to react?

And you're a sucker. Period. Sorry if that comes out harsh but why the hell should people pay for and accept any defective product? Doesn't matter whether its a car or a more than NZ $50 game - if people walked away instead of paying for buggy computer sims then maybe developers would be more careful to release them without all the bugs, or at least with minimal problems. Still, there are enough suckers out there who will keep on buying the bugs because that's the best there is. I'm not happy and I'm not grateful and I'm not losing any more money on future IL2 derivatives. :cool:

http://www.amazon.com/IL-2-Sturmovik-Cliffs-Dover-Pc/dp/B004L5SJ4Y
CaptainDoggles
10-01-2012, 09:01 PM
And you're a sucker. Period. Sorry if that comes out harsh but why the hell should people pay for and accept any defective product? Doesn't matter whether its a car or a more than NZ $50 game - if people walked away instead of paying for buggy computer sims then maybe developers would be more careful to release them without all the bugs, or at least with minimal problems. Still, there are enough suckers out there who will keep on buying the bugs because that's the best there is. I'm not happy and I'm not grateful and I'm not losing any more money on future IL2 derivatives. :cool:

http://www.amazon.com/IL-2-Sturmovik-Cliffs-Dover-Pc/dp/B004L5SJ4Y

This is all true. If people would stop paying for crap, then software developers would stop releasing it.
beepee
10-02-2012, 03:56 PM
And you're a sucker. Period. Sorry if that comes out harsh but why the hell should people pay for and accept any defective product? Doesn't matter whether its a car or a more than NZ $50 game - if people walked away instead of paying for buggy computer sims then maybe developers would be more careful to release them without all the bugs, or at least with minimal problems. Still, there are enough suckers out there who will keep on buying the bugs because that's the best there is. I'm not happy and I'm not grateful and I'm not losing any more money on future IL2 derivatives. :cool:

http://www.amazon.com/IL-2-Sturmovik-Cliffs-Dover-Pc/dp/B004L5SJ4Ythats why they aint made any money out of this bugridden err sim?????