Announcement of the game "IL-2 Sturmovik: Battle of Stalingrad"

[SlipBall]

I don't think it's fair to dismiss everything Zap has to say.

There's a tendency on forums to pigeon-hole posters and decide that everything they say is worthless. Following that, the next stage is to refer to them as 'trolls'. There's a strong element of that creeping in here.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro

I agree...Zap is just a messenger of the situation as it stands. The direction BOS takes in the future will be driven by its
community I suppose.

[David Hayward]

you seem easily amused, and as such would be the perfect customer for RoF-BS projects. just start saving your pennies from now on however, because going by their past track record RoF-BS aims to extract around 500$ for the privilege of entertaining you with their fun (but fictitious) aircraft game over the next 2 years :)

remember, that is also something RoF's rep's let slip shortly after their new project announcement, their aim is not to make something better then the last il2 series sim (CoD), it is their intention to make a game that is more financially profitable to them and their backers (and by its very design the content and features of their new game will be inferior to CoD on most aspects). and as such, neither is it designed to match or compete with complex sims like the DCS series that focus on recreating in the most realistic possible way a ww2 pilot's combat experience.

ahh, and btw you completely missed the meaning of my previous comment, i was comparing aircraft flight behavior in RoF-BS current project to the currently already available information on the next "real il2-sturmovik" installment which is the DCS ww2 sim project (of which the p51 is a part). and in the same way that the previous il2-sturmovik series set the standard in ww2 aviation sim's for the last 10 years, there are all indications that it will continue to do so for many more years in their next project

or were you maybe confused by the use of the "il2 sturmovik" brand name in the RoF-BS current game being developed ? it has NOTHING to do with the old series (it doesnt have the technical information from it, none of the code, none of the designers or researchers etc), and the use of the brand name is simply used as a marketing strategy by the company that owns the brand name to promote sales, it is NOT an actual content description of the product or the creators of the game/program

I'm not confused at all. You're comparing BoS against the best features of every game you can think of, because comparing each game in their entirety does not work so well for you. Landing the aircraft for CoD is too easy? OK, you compare it to DCS instead. DCS has a non-historical map and only a single WW2 aircraft? OK, you compare CoD's aircraft set and map. DCS WW2 doesn't exist yet? OK, you compare to CoD's modded version. And so on.

When DCS WW2 is released I'll buy it. Hopefully it does not have anything as idiotic as CoD's Spitfire Girl.

BTW, you are starting to sound like you are seriously unhinged.

[Les]

The first of the new sims (COD, BoS, DCS) to put out realistic Pacific Theater carrier ops, wins, lol.

But seriously, and going off on a bit of a tangent here, with all the work that goes into maintaining a post IL-2:46 standard of flight model and graphics nowadays, I just don't think there's enough man hours available to cover as much ground as there was in the past. Not while still making a profit anyway.

At the same time, there's still a demand for different theaters of operation and plane-sets. What this says to me is, both/all sims need to focus on at least one map and plane-set for as many different theaters, as soon as possible.

The days of IL-2:'46 and COD style depictions of a huge variety of obscure planes is over, for the time being anyway. In my opinion, BoS and DCS need to focus on creating a diverse base of more limited environments and plane-sets and keep building from there over time.

Regardless of their individual pro's and cons in regards to flight models and graphics and other features (like mission building and multi-player), I think they both/all need to take a 'sample sim' approach to their content in the beginning. With a slower pace of development due to the added complexity of modern sims, they need to give people with an interest in a particular theater, and those who prefer a variety of theaters, something to do while they wait for the overall amount of planes and maps to increase.

It could be argued that kind of diversified approach would diminish the depth of the experience one could have in any one theater, due to the lower number of elements developed for it (initially). But how long would it take to get ten or more different kinds of planes and several maps for one theater of operations anyway? Better to get the whole community, with all it's different preferences, into the sim even at a more superficial level (content wise), than have them wait years just to see their preferred theater at all.

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

Oh, and if anyone out there is waiting/hoping for someone to make the perfect combat flight sim, forget it. They all have and have had their failings and flaws. You'd actually be better off taking a more wholistic approach by playing them all and just focussing on and remembering the best parts of all of them, that way you'd have the best overall combat flight sim experience, it just wouldn't be within the one program.:grin:

[MB_Avro_UK]

A good post, Les. We do need to sit back and see the wider picture.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro

[SlipBall]

the ballistics seem to need some work, and the tracers need a serious downsizing they are massive...hey its alfa :grin:

[Feathered_IV]

I don't think it's fair to dismiss everything Zap has to say.

There's a tendency on forums to pigeon-hole posters and decide that everything they say is worthless. Following that, the next stage is to refer to them as 'trolls'. There's a strong element of that creeping in here.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro

He still stands by his assertions that 777 stole an early alpha of SoW/Cliffs of Dover from Oleg's home computer in order to produce Rise of Flight. It doesn't do to place too much stock on what he writes.

[Chivas]

He still stands by his assertions that 777 stole an early alpha of SoW/Cliffs of Dover from Oleg's home computer in order to produce Rise of Flight. It doesn't do to place too much stock on what he writes.

I doubt they stole an alpha version of COD, but there is little doubt the Rise of Flight game engine learned from the original IL-2 game engine. Loft originally tried to build Rise of Flight using the IL-2 game engine, but said the game engine couldn't do all they were trying to accomplish, just as Oleg needed to build a new game engine for all the features he wanted in the new COD series. I'm quite sure Loft used many of things they learned from the IL-2 engine to build their own, just as Oleg used what he learned from building the IL-2 game engine for the new COD game engine.

[zapatista]

He still stands by his assertions that 777 stole an early alpha of SoW/Cliffs of Dover from Oleg's home computer in order to produce Rise of Flight. It doesn't do to place too much stock on what he writes.

lol, since you have nothing relevant or interesting to say on the topics under discussion here you are resorting to personal insults and paranoid fabrications, deliberately trying to mislead others here with misinformation again ? for those that wernt around in earlier years, let me clarify what DID happen at the time: oleg stated online that there had been attempts to steal the SoW-CoD code from his home (obviously not a normal burglary trying to grab a few valuables, but an IT specific attempt at stealing game code). AND around the same time period an untrustworthy employee(s) had taken some elements of unfinished game code out of the office (at least several times over a period of time), and that some of this material had ended up being passed onto competitors. from then on oleg never took game code home anymore and they tightened security measures at the office AND employees got sacked.

THAT is what we do know directly from what oleg stated himself :) (from various different posts he made around that time)

the second piece of the puzzle is that around the same time period when that happened (shortly thereafter ?) a number of programers/artists got sacked from olegs team and oleg decided to restart his project from scratch and decided to develop a new gfx/game engine that was even more ambitious (which is il2-CoD). again, that is FACT ! the third element must be a choker for you, because it is shortly thereafter that suddenly RoF popped up on the horizon and they seemed to have made an awful lot of initial progress out of the blue when they first started :) again, chronologically IN TIME that event is closely related to the previous 2 i mentioned and that is a simple historical fact. AND we know that some ex oleg employee(s) then joined the budding RoF team shortly thereafter.

since you seem to have problems processing bits of information in a rational and logical manner, let me help you a bit more by putting some of this together before you go off into more paranoid hyperbole. - the oleg code theft attempts were done by IT experts, not amateurs, but it was UNSUCCESSFUL. this was around the time lawlessness was high in russia, and it could have been by any number of maffia gangs for commercial profit, or it could have been done by a competitor (of which as a flightsim product there are very very few, particularly russian/east-block based)
- from the few comments oleg made about the untrustworthy employee taking code or unfinished game-elements out of the office (which was over a period of time, not a single event), it sounded like it might have been more out of stupidity than evil intent, because iirc this individual then showed/shared it with some programmer friends (not employees of oleg, but either "in between jobs" or working for other companies ?). the end result however was the same, some of this information (game design, in game objects, or partial code) DID end up reaching 3e parties.
- whatever was leaked could never have been a major finished piece of code, since oleg designs his games in a modular fashion and never one coder had access to the whole assembled game.
- the russian/east-block flightsim coding world employs only a very small number of people who are specialists in their relevant field, and it is to be expected that some of them will drift/rotate from one group to another, but what we DO know is that some of the same people who were sacked by oleg around that time then started working for the RoF project shortly thereafter
- oleg did restart the SoW project from scratch shortly after all of this happened. to what degree is it related to the thefts and leaks we dont know, but these event are overlapping in time. similarly, were the other sackings in olegs office all related to thefts and leaks, we dont know, it could have instead been because of competency and skill issues. but SOME were sacked because they were untrustworthy (unprofessional) or had leaked code, that we DO know !

and THOSE are the facts that i was previously referring to years ago in this forum (which you partially seem to remember and then wove your own fantasy from) :) . but to understand and recall these facts and events you might need to use a few more brain cells then you are using for your mentally lazy accusations, fabrications, and personal insults. however rationally dealing with actual facts in a logical manner makes the world much more interesting :)

[Feathered_IV]

I only read the beginning of your post and skipped the rest. Sorry.

[SlipBall]

its an interesting story, maybe llya will write a tell all book someday :-P

[SlipBall]

I LOL'd when I read this. Landing an aircraft in CoD is laughably easy compared to BoS.

this may be true I don't have BOS...but remember this was not the case with the original game. It was the community that wanted more simplified, and so we have aircraft on rails today in clod

[arthursmedley]

this may be true I don't have BOS...but remember this was not the case with the original game. It was the community that wanted more simplified, and so we have aircraft on rails today in clod



Eh? When did the community ask for this, lol? SlipBall, if you read Luthier's farewell you'll see no one on the dev team ever read any of this stuff let alone the bug tracker! Only Luthier and BlackSix ever dealt in the English language.

[SlipBall]

Eh? When did the community ask for this, lol? SlipBall, if you read Luthier's farewell you'll see no one on the dev team ever read any of this stuff let alone the bug tracker! Only Luthier and BlackSix ever dealt in the English language.


Arthur I might be wrong and I have to admit I was guessing the why. But I remember the complaints about the shaking, so I assumed that was it when most of the shaking was gone. Anyway it was more exciting to me the way it was in the beginning, although more of a challenge with the landings and gunnery. :)

[David Hayward]

this may be true I don't have BOS...but remember this was not the case with the original game. It was the community that wanted more simplified, and so we have aircraft on rails today in clod

I don't recall any of that, and I've been reading this forum since before the game was released.

[kendo65]

Slipball, as someone who was in from Day 1 I don't recognise the picture you keep painting of a near-perfect initial release that was ruined unnecessarily by the devs making pointless and unwanted changes.

The game at release had huge problems.

There were big complaints right from the start about FM.

[fruitbat]

Slipball, as someone who was in from Day 1 I don't recognise the picture you keep painting of a near-perfect initial release that was ruined unnecessarily by the devs making pointless and unwanted changes.

The game at release had huge problems.

There were big complaints right from the start about FM.

yeah, not sure where this perfect game on release stuff is coming from myself, lol.

[SlipBall]

well certainly neither one is trouble free, the earlier release I find more enjoyable...tons of bugs but still lots of immersion for my tastes :cool:

[vranac]

Slipball, as someone who was in from Day 1 I don't recognise the picture you keep painting of a near-perfect initial release that was ruined unnecessarily by the devs making pointless and unwanted changes.

The game at release had huge problems.

There were big complaints right from the start about FM.

Of course it had problems for you, trying to run sim with two generations old gfx card. I concluded that from your sig.
If you had midrange card from 4xx or 5xx series you would see the difference.

[Les]

I still think Cliffs Of Dover should have had a 'Perfect' graphic mode like the original IL-2 series.

There were lots of people who happily played the original series without even trying to play with 'Perfect' settings, and it took years sometimes for hardware to come out that was capable of pushing some of the effects in 'Perfect' mode. But at least people knew what the deal was, and the game still looked alright in 'Normal' mode.

I think 'Cliffs Of Dover' just wasn't scalable enough in the same way. The hardware on release (CPU and GPU) wasn't powerful enough to brute force good frame-rates at the best settings when there was a lot of action happening, but turning settings down quickly made the game look substandard.

As I remember it, they did optimize the graphics engine bit by bit, partially by removing some effects. Then eventually they basically re-wrote the whole thing altogether. But after that they never put back in some of the effects they'd removed along the way. And that's what we were left with.

Pretty sure they never changed the flight model to make landing easier, but they did stop the needles in the control panel instruments from fluttering, which was most noticeable when landing. I think they might have toned down the overall cockpit shaking as well, which might have made landing seem easier at least. And of course the positive G engine cut-out was toned down, which might also have made landing easier in some cases.

As someone who had a decent system and was willing to play the game within it's limits, I too think the game was more immersive in its earlier form and have lots of good memories of flying around in it. Don't want to dwell on it though.

[SlipBall]

I still think Cliffs Of Dover should have had a 'Perfect' graphic mode like the original IL-2 series.

There were lots of people who happily played the original series without even trying to play with 'Perfect' settings, and it took years sometimes for hardware to come out that was capable of pushing some of the effects in 'Perfect' mode. But at least people knew what the deal was, and the game still looked alright in 'Normal' mode.

I think 'Cliffs Of Dover' just wasn't scalable enough in the same way. The hardware on release (CPU and GPU) wasn't powerful enough to brute force good frame-rates at the best settings when there was a lot of action happening, but turning settings down quickly made the game look substandard.

As I remember it, they did optimize the graphics engine bit by bit, partially by removing some effects. Then eventually they basically re-wrote the whole thing altogether. But after that they never put back in some of the effects they'd removed along the way. And that's what we were left with.

Pretty sure they never changed the flight model to make landing easier, but they did stop the needles in the control panel instruments from fluttering, which was most noticeable when landing. I think they might have toned down the overall cockpit shaking as well, which might have made landing seem easier at least. And of course the positive G engine cut-out was toned down, which might also have made landing easier in some cases.

As someone who had a decent system and was willing to play the game within it's limits, I too think the game was more immersive in its earlier form and have lots of good memories of flying around in it. Don't want to dwell on it though.


I don't want to dwell either but being a off-liner I really have a lot of fun with the game. I think that the FM was changed a bit though, most noticeable to me on take-off/landings and acceleration in the E3...

I think I see some very immersive qualities in BOS and I'm looking forward to checking it out.

https://vimeo.com/81538285
in case some don't remember the immersive cockpit feel of clod

[kendo65]

Of course it had problems for you, trying to run sim with two generations old gfx card. I concluded that from your sig.
If you had midrange card from 4xx or 5xx series you would see the difference.

Possibly a fair point...but the story behind that:

A month before COD's release I spent £600 upgrading my PC (new CPU, MB, RAM) and buying new joystick, throttle and rudder pedals.

As what I thought was going to be a strictly temporary measure I decided to hold off on updating the graphics card until the game came out to see how the GTX260 faired (there was huge speculation before release about how demanding the game would be - lots of speculation - no real evidence)

I was SO disappointed (shocked actually!) about the state of the game that I could never justify to myself spending anything more to run a game I didn't like at higher frame rates. And at that point even those with up to date video cards were not having wonderful experiences.

Haven't been doing much gaming at all recently so the 260 is still there - but obviously well due for an upgrade.

[arthursmedley]

being a off-liner I really have a lot of fun with the game.



If Team Fusion manage to get a.i. radio commands working then I'd be right up for some of the off-line campaigns out there.

SlipBall, you used to fly online in IL2 1946 occasionally, no? You really want to make time to try it in CoD. Its epic!!!!:grin:

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/Launcher2013-03-2700-53-41-37.jpg
http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/Launcher2013-03-2701-06-15-31.jpghttp://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/Launcher2013-06-1321-09-15-71.pnghttp://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/Launcher2013-06-0601-11-54-83.pnghttp://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/Launcher2013-06-0700-54-26-90.pnghttp://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/Launcher2013-03-2700-54-20-87.jpg

[arthursmedley]

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/shot_20131028_000853.pngOoops! Dunno how I've managed to post 'em like that but I hope you get where I'm coming from. Online - especially with some guys on t/s - is an absolute hoot!

Atag server, Team Fusion patch.:cool:


http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/shot_20131026_221539.png
http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/Launcher2013-06-0700-55-32-32.pnghttp://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/Launcher2013-06-0700-42-22-64.pnghttp://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/shot_20131028_020640.pnghttp://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/shot_20131026_211647.png

[Feathered_IV]

Great screens AS! Love that one of the close-in Hurricane.

[fruitbat]

KL-B looks familiar Arthur, lol.

[arthursmedley]

Wot, this one?


:cool:http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/shot_20131026_235039.png

[SlipBall]

great shots Arthur and great fun, the comradery :)...I think on-line is the best experience but I rarely have the time to search for a victim, or become one...off-line is instant, plus I'm hooked on the EU release before many of the changes occurred with the game. The mod has the on-line element much improved, so every once in awhile I will pop in...and in that video.. I'll work on my timing, I was supposed to drop right on his six, lol

[Sokol1]

This guy is used to do videos with CloD, his Bo$ "review":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_DAthuV2ng#t=0

The only thing "bad" is these exaggerated "WT" fire/smoke effects (IMO,OC).

;)

Sokol1

[arthursmedley]

Rockets and other exploding ironmongery!:)
http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/Il-22013-12-2102-55-42-18.png
http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/il-22013-12-2022-29-52-98.png
http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/il-22013-12-2100-30-31-78.png
http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/Il-22013-12-2103-00-04-67.png
http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh112/arthursmedley/il-22013-12-2101-04-31-81.png

[SlipBall]

I'm glad that you like it arthur

[GF_Mastiff]

some il2 videos

http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2vqPAnG1cQfpWMt9vhRI9g?feature=watch

[SlipBall]

looking at the BOS map today, it should give great fps for its players...

[Feathered_IV]

I like the look of the city so far. Will be interesting to see how it develops.
Weapons are back. New gunpods, new effects etc. Need to practice my strafing runs for when the Sturmovik gets here.

http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd119/Feathered_IV/Screenshot77995_zps7841917f.jpg

[MB_Avro_UK]

I am possibly wrong here.

But do vast expanses of snow and ice make for better frame rates?

Best Regards,
MB_Avro

[SlipBall]

In CLod at least for myself, I get bad fps when near numerous colorful buildings, or just buildings in general

and,.. my best fps is when over the vast blue channel, so I would guess a hearty yes to your question :wink:

[Feathered_IV]

I don't think it's the colour of the pixels so much as the bump mapping, reflections and shadow settings that go with it. The white landscape seems to dull down any shimmering at a distance though, which means you can comfortably dial back the AA filtering quite a bit.

[CWMV]

I don't know what it it's but I'm extremely bored by BoS thus far.
I understand that it's only 36 percent finished but I just can't find any reason to play. I have the premium pre order and I've probably played les than an hour grand total.
For the life of me I don't know why but I just can't get into this.

[robtek]

I don't know what it it's but I'm extremely bored by BoS thus far.
I understand that it's only 36 percent finished but I just can't find any reason to play. I have the premium pre order and I've probably played les than an hour grand total.
For the life of me I don't know why but I just can't get into this.

I have the same experience.
Maybe because it is like feeling a step down from the CloD level, regardless of all CloD faults.

[SlipBall]

I don't know what it it's but I'm extremely bored by BoS thus far.
I understand that it's only 36 percent finished but I just can't find any reason to play. I have the premium pre order and I've probably played les than an hour grand total.
For the life of me I don't know why but I just can't get into this.


Yes I thought that this would happen to a few and zapatista had predicted it would. I think that many will stick with it though, and a few will move on to a more serious and difficult type of play in 2014. Each year more & more graduates to a more realistic type of piloting. I know from myself getting the P-51, it is a real challenge to fly half as good as those WWII pilots did...but its fun learning :)

[MB_Avro_UK]

I tend to agree with the above observations regarding BoS player interest.

For me, Stalingrad was a ground war and not an air war. It was an immense struggle between both sides of an almost unimaginable magnitude. There was nothing similar on the Western Front. We know that there was a brave attempt by the German LW to supply their army, but it would never have succeeded.

Cliffs of Dover relates to an air campaign. This to me makes it more interesting. I would also be interested in campaigns involving RAF and 8th Air Force activity over Germany and the rest of Europe.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro

[GregHouse]

Geeeez with the bitching! Sure, Clod was promising, the engine management and whatnot. But from the beginning to the last patch, everybody were complaining. Where are we now? Even the developers admitted that it's just not gonna work out! Still people keep 'plaining about BoS. Well tell you what- SIMS don't sell anymore in case you didn't realise. There HAS to be a marketing plan, which in this case means a campaign that speaks volumes to a large audience (russian especially). And the game itself, I have not had the opportunity to try it out yet, as I'm poor:-(. But from what I see, it looks BLOODY good, and judging from RoF point of view, I don't think the physics or damage modelling will suck either. I just want a GOOD, playable WW2 air combat sim. It's been too long. If you want a WW2 plane sim with minimal emphasis on the playability, wait for the Luthier's DCS sim and stfu.

Happy New Year's simmers with hugs and kisses to all! <3

[MB_Avro_UK]

Are you a tough guy away from a keyboard ;)

[Bearcat]

Slipball, as someone who was in from Day 1 I don't recognise the picture you keep painting of a near-perfect initial release that was ruined unnecessarily by the devs making pointless and unwanted changes.
The game at release had huge problems.
There were big complaints right from the start about FM.
yeah, not sure where this perfect game on release stuff is coming from myself, lol.

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y194/Bearcat99/denial_zpsfa2dddd4.jpg


Of course it had problems for you, trying to run sim with two generations old gfx card. I concluded that from your sig.
If you had midrange card from 4xx or 5xx series you would see the difference.

Yes but someone with a top flight 8800 should have been able to at least get the sim to run.. I couldn't even get it to run over water.. with one plane.. That was un acceptible and the main reason why CoD failed initially .. even if there were some who ran it with no problems..

I still think Cliffs Of Dover should have had a 'Perfect' graphic mode like the original IL-2 series.

There were lots of people who happily played the original series without even trying to play with 'Perfect' settings, and it took years sometimes for hardware to come out that was capable of pushing some of the effects in 'Perfect' mode. But at least people knew what the deal was, and the game still looked alright in 'Normal' mode.

I think 'Cliffs Of Dover' just wasn't scalable enough in the same way. The hardware on release (CPU and GPU) wasn't powerful enough to brute force good frame-rates at the best settings when there was a lot of action happening, but turning settings down quickly made the game look substandard.


+1.. On it's lowest settings it should have looked like IL2 on Medium or High..



Geeeez with the bitching! Sure, Clod was promising, the engine management and whatnot. But from the beginning to the last patch, everybody were complaining. Where are we now? Even the developers admitted that it's just not gonna work out! Still people keep 'plaining about BoS. Well tell you what- SIMS don't sell anymore in case you didn't realise. There HAS to be a marketing plan, which in this case means a campaign that speaks volumes to a large audience (russian especially). And the game itself, I have not had the opportunity to try it out yet, as I'm poor:-(. But from what I see, it looks BLOODY good, and judging from RoF point of view, I don't think the physics or damage modelling will suck either. I just want a GOOD, playable WW2 air combat sim. It's been too long. If you want a WW2 plane sim with minimal emphasis on the playability, wait for the Luthier's DCS sim and stfu.
Happy New Year's simmers with hugs and kisses to all! <3

LMAO! Kinda strong but ..

BoS is pretty good regardless to what some say and it is an Alpha at 36%.. The current map is tiny when compared to the final map.. and many of the effects are still not there.. BoS also runs on a variety of rigs .. something CoD did not do very well at all when it was released 5 years late I might add which added insult to injury.. Don't forget if yiou recall folks had been waiting for CoD for quite some time. It was that long wait and the expectations that they engendered and the final product that was installed on folks' drives after that wait that was the main cause of the bitterness around CoD.TF has done an AMAZING job in turning CoD into a viable sim .. and frankly IMO a sim that can only be enjoyed by a few hundred folks ... is not a viable sim. CoD as it is now can be enjoyed by just about anyone with a decent rig and it doesn't have to be top of the line. It can even be a few years old.. Today I can run CoD TF 4.0 on my old rig from 2011 ... which I still have. I should have been able to do that in 2011.

This doesn't have to be a my schlong is bigger than yours kind of deal.. Like it or not BoS is going to be fantastic and you (a general you not a specific YOU directed at one person..) can either enjoy it or not .... Hopefully DCS WWII will be on time give or take a month or two at the most and be thoroughly enjoyable.. even if it has bugs, which is to be expected.. I have no doubt that CoD will continue to flourish and even if development stopped dead in it's tracks where it is now there is enough there to make it the best BoB environment to fly in.. and IL2 will probably still be flown for a long time and I doubt that we will ever see it's likes again in any WWII sim in terms of plane set, theater set and pound for pound playability..

I don't understand why folks have to knock one product over another.. or the adherants of one product over another as if they were Mr. Macy ragging Mr. Bloomingdale. It isn't like anyone here created any of these sims. I have supported every one of the above mentioned sims.. because I am a simmer at heart.. and I would like to see them all succeed... but at this point from what I have seen from the teams involved BoS has the best chance to truly succeed IL2. I don't see a lot of theaters coming from the DCS WWII camp.. nor do I see that coming from the CoD camp within the next 24 months which ios nopt to say that both products will not grow and do well.. but I just see BoS covering at least two more theaters or regions of conflict within the same time frame.

[SlipBall]

BOS is very good for entry level, so I think the more new pilots the better for the genre.

[vranac]

Yes but someone with a top flight 8800 should have been able to at least get the sim to run.. I couldn't even get it to run over water.. with one plane.. That was un acceptible and the main reason why CoD failed initially .. even if there were some who ran it with no problems..

+1.. On it's lowest settings it should have looked like IL2 on Medium or High..


Man, you're talking about gfx card from 2007. Even that gtx260 is two times faster than 8800gt.
And you're wrong, two of my friends were flying at the release. One had cheap AMD x2 and 9600gt 512MB (~15% slower than 8800gt) and he was flying online and shooting down planes, on low settings and 1300 res of course. Second one had gts250 1GB(=9800gt=8800gt) and he was getting 20-30 fps over land low @1920.
Those are pics from one friend that is still flying on 9800gt and he is regular on ATAG, big map, lots of action.

http://www.dodaj.rs/f/Q/dH/2mWERzHV/2013-06-2700003.jpg
http://www.dodaj.rs/f/3Y/13d/1ZD0J79P/2013-08-2000001.jpg
http://www.dodaj.rs/f/2k/SM/24NrOR0F/screen-2013-09-0522-38re.jpg

Does it look perfect? No, low res textures are noticeable on wings and in cockpit. But that doesn't look bad at all.
Same as in BoS but there are no hi-res textures at all. When I see a screenshot with look on a wing and those poor textures its like someone puts finger in my eye.

And I can imagine how the artist who made those beautiful cockpits of 109 feels when he saw them trashed in BoS.
He even wrote few lines on sukhoi. Sadness.

P.S. sorry for huge ss.

[SlipBall]

Man, you're talking about gfx card from 2007. Even that gtx260 is two times faster than 8800gt.
And you're wrong, two of my friends were flying at the release. One had cheap AMD x2 and 9600gt 512MB (~15% slower than 8800gt) and he was flying online and shooting down planes, on low settings and 1300 res of course. Second one had gts250 1GB(=9800gt=8800gt) and he was getting 20-30 fps over land low @1920.
Those are pics from one friend that is still flying on 9800gt and he is regular on ATAG, big map, lots of action.

Does it look perfect? No, low res textures are noticeable on wings and in cockpit. But that doesn't look bad at all.
Same as in BoS but there are no hi-res textures at all. When I see a screenshot with look on a wing and those poor textures its like someone puts finger in my eye.

And I can imagine how the artist who made those beautiful cockpits of 109 feels when he saw them trashed in BoS.
He even wrote few lines on sukhoi. Sadness.

P.S. sorry for huge ss.


You are wasting your time my friend, it will fail on the mindless. Bearcat is a prime example of what is wrong in our genre. People who don't want to see these sims get too beautiful or complicated, because then an up-grade would have to be done to their rig. And so a great studio has folded, and reputations have been tarnished and even destroyed. The game was a masterpiece on release with bugs that would have been corrected in time, but should have been corrected only for strong PC's.(Oleg might have taken that route, we will never know) llya, the chopped up game that is out there today, is nothing but a sad remnant.

[KG26_Alpha]

Ok quit the personal stuff and keep it on track .

Thanks

[vranac]

You are wasting your time my friend, it will fail on the mindless. Bearcat is a prime example of what is wrong in our genre. People who don't want to see these sims get too beautiful or complicated, because then an up-grade would have to be done to their rig.

Yes I know that mate, but I just can't stand when some people write stuff thats not true. You can see on one of those screanshots my friend TURK Can he was regularly flying with c2duo and gtx260, he had problems because Clod needs more than two cores and he upgreded graphic card to gtx670 but no joy , CPU power is needed also.

And I agree with you completely, someone wants nice graphics but don't want to upgrade PC.

[arthursmedley]

The game was a masterpiece on release



Why the re-writing of history? I just don't understand. Here's a quote from Luthier;

" We shipped a product that had too many technical issues for us to really focus on finer elements of gameplay. There had never been a point, we're not even there today, where we could sit back, look at the code, and say, hell, what a great foundation, let's build a great game on top of it. "

Here's another;

"Obviously no one here wants to repeat the Cliffs of Dover release fiasco. We really do want to get it right next time."

Or even;

"I can’t even remember anything that was cut per se."

And finally;

"The situation sucks. I see no reason to sugarcoat it with bull. I don't want to go make empty promises or try to prove that black is white. We released a faulty game."

What happened........happened but CoD ain't over yet. Be sure!

[RedToo]

Two things:

1)
Not a masterpiece on release, but not broken either. Ran absolutely fine on my machine (i7 3.4, GTX 580 3gig, 8gig ram). I never have understood what happened in the forums on the sims release. Not rational.

2)
Any quotes from Luthier need a pretty big grain of salt.

RedToo.

[CWMV]

Ya it always ran fine for me, but soooooo many bugs.
But BoS ruins and looks perfect, by all accounts it's shaping up to be the perfect sim except for the utter boredom.

[klem]

Ya it always ran fine for me, but soooooo many bugs.
But BoS ruins and looks perfect, by all accounts it's shaping up to be the perfect sim except for the utter boredom.

Sorry to hear BoS 'ruins' :)

btw that old 'banned' quote is way out of date at June 2012 and in itself very boring.

[Bearcat]

Man, you're talking about gfx card from 2007. Even that gtx260 is two times faster than 8800gt.
And you're wrong, two of my friends were flying at the release. One had cheap AMD x2 and 9600gt 512MB (~15% slower than 8800gt) and he was flying online and shooting down planes, on low settings and 1300 res of course.

I am wrong... so you were in my house and looking over my shoulder..? I never said I had an 8800.. I had a 9800GTX actually.. on an Fx-60 processor.. and I could not run it upon release.. It was a slideshow. I said that a person with a high end 8800 .. a card that was a little less powerful than mine should have been able to at least run it.. The exact same rig runs it today... after all the TF work.. That is my entire point. My other point was .. had CoD been as scalable as it is now upon release it probably would have garnered more support as opposed to all the bad press it got. All that bad press was not just cheap schmucks who refused to upgrade their rigs.. Just because you and a few hundred others out of the thousands who bought it could run it on your PCs does not mean that it was flawless upon release and that the problems that people had were figments of their imaginations or manifestations of their tightwad nature..

You are wasting your time my friend, it will fail on the mindless. Bearcat is a prime example of what is wrong in our genre. People who don't want to see these sims get too beautiful or complicated, because then an up-grade would have to be done to their rig. And so a great studio has folded, and reputations have been tarnished and even destroyed. The game was a masterpiece on release with bugs that would have been corrected in time, but should have been corrected only for strong PC's.(Oleg might have taken that route, we will never know) llya, the chopped up game that is out there today, is nothing but a sad remnant.

Yes I know that mate, but I just can't stand when some people write stuff thats not true.

vranac: See the above post. You were not in my house on my rig trying to get the dadblamed sim to run so you have no cause to call me a liar.

Slip: That was totally uncalled for.. and Alpha, I am sorry but I have to respond to this post.

If this is what you think then you obviously know absolutely nothing about me based on the post you just made so you really need to get your facts straight before you go shooting off at the mouth about things you know nothing about. CoD was a piece of crap on the outset.. otherwise it would have sold much better and the people who did drop their cash for it and felt burned would not be such a large group of folks.. As I have said across multiple forums over the past year or so from M4T to SHQ, IL2 and even here.. even in this very thread.. it is better now than it has ever been as far as being playable by the masses.. Your attitude and the way that you and many who think like you do resort to insulting people who have or have had issues with CoD in the past is also just as detrimental to the success of the sim as it's buggy release and truth be told that very same attitude makes a lot of folks just wave CoD off to this very day and also keeps them away from here. Even though the sim runs much better by all accounts .. even if it isn't as whatever the heck it is you guys keep complaining about is missing from the sim since it was "stripped down" it looks pretty d@mned good to me.. and as I said the same rig that could not run it in 2011 regardless to settings now runs it decently enough to at least see some of what it is about. That should have been the case from day one. The fact that you guys keep jumping on this nonsensical rewriting of the history train in spite of the fact that 98% of the folks who may have had issues in the beginning, and complained about it, regardless to how tactless they may have complained back then, now say it is great .. tells me that you guys just want to argue and be rude and insulting to all those fools who obviously were not as smart or adept as you were or your handful of friends who managed to see CoD for the masterpiece it was upon release..

Ya right..

Neither of you know anything about me and my wallet or what I do and have done in the past to support this genre so I would appreciate if you would keep your misinformed opinions about me and my character to yourself. CoD is a great piece of kit now.. I hope that TF can get whatever they need to continue doing what they do and add more in the way of planes and maps etc... but I hope that you and people who think like you do really take a step back from this chest thumping BS thing you guys do.. because it is getting old and tired and totally uncalled for.

BOS is very good for entry level, so I think the more new pilots the better for the genre.

Hahahahaha...

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y194/Bearcat99/denial_zpsfa2dddd4.jpg
De Nile .. it's not just a river in Egypt... Have you actually flown BoS? I wonder with that statement..



Ok quit the personal stuff and keep it on track .
Thanks

~!S!~ Out............

[vranac]

Well, I don't know you but I can conclude something from your writing. You had ancient PC when CloD came out. You read forums, Oleg stated many times that the new sim will be very demanding. What have you expected with 4-5 years old PC (CPU 6 years) ?
But I prefer to believe to my friends whom I helped to set up the game.

I'll tell you one analogy. I started playing il2 online with old and slow PC and it was almost unplayable. So I decided to upgrade. Some Athlon AMD CPU from good batch and OC'ed it to 2.1 GHz, very fast for that time (Intel was faster but AMD was better in games then). I bought midrange GPU 6600 also chosen model which could run on frequencies like 6600gt.
That was decent midrange PC of that time. And you know what, when I joined populated server 50-60 pilots with some flak around I got clap, clap, clap... 15 fps.
And that was 4-5 years after the release of il2. Only release of dual core CPU's solved that.
On the other hand with CloD I upgraded before the release with fast CPU and midrange GPU and had no problems at all. There were bugs, but most of those affected mission makers. I have nice collection of tracks from that spring summer.

You're right about that CloD sold badly. My opinion is that there is no more than few 10.000 flight sim fans out there and 1C expectations was huge.

Do you think BoS will sell 200.000 copies ? I really doubt that.
That number is from Loft.
They'll be lucky if they hit 50.000.

[Bearcat]

I don't think 50k is unreachable.. and just touching on CoD ... the fact that I can play it now on the same "ancient" rig if I wanted to tells me what I heed to know. TF is doing some great stuff and the only thing I wonder is why the people who produced the sim and had all the marbles could not do that by 2012.

[vranac]

You didn't understand, everything under 200.000 is a disaster.

CloD was optimized by MG in official patches.Try last official patch. While TF is doing a great job and optimized particle effects,explosion effects,clouds...

MG team was working on a sequel which we would have been playing already (alpha was expected Q1 2013) on advanced engine.That was priority for them and like Ilya said, fixing CloD would not bring any income. However they patched CloD regularly.

http://s58.photobucket.com/user/restranger/library/BoM?sort=3&page=1


We got modded RoF WW2 instead which is a step back in every aspect.
I expected FM to be good at least but it won't. FM is final for LaGG and 109 and LaGG manual is very detailed for every flight regime with exact figures and behavior of the aircraft in specific situations. And in BoS it's waaay off.

[Igo kyu]

I'll tell you one analogy. I started playing il2 online with old and slow PC and it was almost unplayable. So I decided to upgrade. Some Athlon AMD CPU from good batch and OC'ed it to 2.1 GHz, very fast for that time (Intel was faster but AMD was better in games then). I bought midrange GPU 6600 also chosen model which could run on frequencies like 6600gt.
That was decent midrange PC of that time. And you know what, when I joined populated server 50-60 pilots with some flak around I got clap, clap, clap... 15 fps.
And that was 4-5 years after the release of il2. Only release of dual core CPU's solved that.
You spent your money wrong. I had an Athlon 1GHz (not overclocked) and a Geforce 2 GTS (a £300 card in 2000 ad) and IL*2 ran fine, offline as I always play, but fine up to Forgotten Battles. For Pacific Fighters I went up to a Althlon 64 3000, and a Radeon X800, and again, no problems whatever. You want to game with a crap GPU you will have to put up with crap framerates.

On the other hand with CloD I upgraded before the release with fast CPU and midrange GPU and had no problems at all.
Oleg listened to the people who thought cheap GPUs were the answer. It was a mistake.

There were bugs, but most of those affected mission makers. I have nice collection of tracks from that spring summer.

You're right about that CloD sold badly. My opinion is that there is no more than few 10.000 flight sim fans out there and 1C expectations was huge.

Do you think BoS will sell 200.000 copies ? I really doubt that.
That number is from Loft.
They'll be lucky if they hit 50.000.
I dunno. I think that there are a lot of potential fans, but it will depend on what shows up, what the DRM is like (I have no problem with copy protection, but tell me I have limited installs and crap like that, and I won't play. I won't "pirate" but I won't pay either, and "freeware" with pay for everything after the install? not for me).

[vranac]

You spent your money wrong. I had an Athlon 1GHz (not overclocked) and a Geforce 2 GTS (a £300 card in 2000 ad) and IL*2 ran fine, offline as I always play, but fine up to Forgotten Battles. For Pacific Fighters I went up to a Althlon 64 3000, and a Radeon X800, and again, no problems whatever. You want to game with a crap GPU you will have to put up with crap framerates.

I was talking about online gameplay. Il2 was always running much better on nvidia cards because ATI drivers was always bad with OpenGL. And you couldn't use Water=4 (new water) IIRC.


Oleg listened to the people who thought cheap GPUs were the answer. It was a mistake.

Really don't know what you mean with this statement.

[Bearcat]

You didn't understand, everything under 200.000 is a disaster.
CloD was optimized by MG in official patches.Try last official patch. While TF is doing a great job and optimized particle effects,explosion effects,clouds...
MG team was working on a sequel which we would have been playing already (alpha was expected Q1 2013) on advanced engine.That was priority for them and like Ilya said, fixing CloD would not bring any income. However they patched CloD regularly.

We got modded RoF WW2 instead which is a step back in every aspect.
I expected FM to be good at least but it won't. FM is final for LaGG and 109 and LaGG manual is very detailed for every flight regime with exact figures and behavior of the aircraft in specific situations. And in BoS it's waaay off.

BoS is not a modded RoF and it has nothing to do with CoD and the reality of the matter is that had 1CMG been smart they would have kept the Storm of War name and released CoD as the first of many on the improved engine closer to it's scheduled release time with the idea of expanding it as it went along just like IL2. They didn't have to have all the extra stuff that they had in there initially. 2048 skins with alpha layers, shadows, more detailed CEM, DM & FM and more features in the QMB & MB would have been enough initially. They did not need to have the full level of fidelity that they put into the sim because it only complicated things.. They had no real competition. They had a ready made fan base of rabid fans who had been waiting 5 years and a legacy gateway sim in IL2 and the name of IL2 and 1CMG. At the time CoD was released there was nothing even on the horizon that could really compete with IL2 much.. much less CoD. Sure there were some sims that did some things better.. but to this day there is no sim that does all that IL2 does as well as it does it proportionally to itself.. (I hope I am making sense to you .. I understand what I am saying but.. ;) )

I don't know numbers and all that and I do understand what you mean about the numbers.. as far as sales go.. but I do know flight sims and what makes a good one and I guarantee you that had they been more practical and less ambitious in the short term they would have made out a lot better in the long term. The initial failure of CoD and even the presence of BoS is solely the result of poor management decisions at 1CMG.

I also am pretty certain that as much as some want to dismiss BoS as a not ready for prime time, entry level modded RoF .. it will be much more than that and it will be around for a long time. It will have a good FM.. a good DM and it will be thoroughly enjoyable and do what CoD had the opportunity and should have done 3+ years ago. Whether or not DCS WWII takes things to an even higher level remains to be seen.. It can.. it all depends on how the shoe is made as to whether or not it will be a comfy fit. We shall surely see.. but all those dismissing BoS especially if they haven't even flown it have no basis in reality for their opinions. We will know the deal before summer ...

[vranac]

You can write your expectations as long as you like but I can tell you even if you're moderator on BoS forum you're completely uninformed.

What is modded il2 or any other game ? You make new 3D model ( or take one somebody else made like BoS devs did) new textures, new effects and put them into a existing engine.
Can you tell me the difference between that and what 1CGS is doing please ?

BoS doesn't have anything to do with il2 shturmmovik except marketing.
You got to have vision to make a great sim. To make something better than others.
You're talking about rabid fans, which ones? Those who want new super sim and don't want to upgrade their PC to run it ?
Bad management that you're talking about it's only 1C bad management. They decide how many people they'll hire. FYI few of those guys, main programmers wrote some stuff about development at sukhoi. Here is one and you'll see a lot of familiar names there.
Posted by-atas-
Why you left, if it's not a secret? To develop more accurate FM budget was not or just no one thought that was not necessary?

Introducing meticulousness, scrupulousness and ambition (in a good way) OMA can imagine that did not suit him FM 10 years ago with modifications VMG. What did not allow much detail FM over the years: the unreadiness of the engine, the need to do something else, a higher priority?

Interest because want to understand what changes can we expect in the future, given that the MG is not looking for a programmer FM, and FM tuner. 10% is too much to IMHO for these days.

Do not quite understand the comparison with the Mustang. For real Spit MI is not possible to calculate for comparison?

Yes there was a budget. Just last year, initially allotted to rework Ila in CloD, I had to make a new FM, new AI, a new strategy for the network and re-negotiation. Well,that had planned the people responsible for the project. The rest of the guys had a similar loading. And if you need to do something a lot of very small forces in a short time, then nothing but a very large pile of .. can not happen - it's the law.
Assessed my capabilities, I knew I could handle only one of these tasks. I chose the new AI. I thoroughly zarefaktoril it. Other tasks decided in the minimum.

I do not go away from MG but from SHG [ gaming i think]. Because stopped getting satisfaction from what I do. In FM WT since Ila there are several deep methodological problems, the cause of which I, frankly, is still not entirely clear. First of all - this is some perestabilizatsiya to yaw and the consequences thereof. But it's nuances of fairly high order, understandable only to specialists.

That took data on the Mustang is easily explained. Americans are very well measured and documented their planes. All data are freely available on the Internet. There are blowing data and polars, and speed and weight, and even moments of inertia. Aircraft from other countries is not as well documented. Apparently,that wasn't important for them then.

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=2&hl=sr&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php%3Ft%3D72875%26s%3Dfab04bb33e64bb42a aa98be2db699ae7%26p%3D1733029%26viewfull%3D1&usg=ALkJrhj8xHysKy87cjq4FT875j5W7ZuPPQ#post1733029

Just to inform you that FM is finished and final according to Han.

Posted 26 December 2013 - 17:56


72AG_martefi, on 26 Dec 2013 - 10:29, said:

This can not be.
I look then straight festival militant ignorance ... LaGG FM is final, this is how it should fly. The higher the speed the greater the overload at the same angle of attack = less "drawdown".

Go practical aerodynamics that if read on what some aircraft before notifying ITALICS in what neither belmesa do not understand ...

Just sort of a fairy ...

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://forum.il2sturmovik.ru/topic/122-fizika-i-aerodinamika-v-bzs/page-70&usg=ALkJrhggyalQgYC0OZvaqiMpJHSsMKLeDA#entry115012

And when some guys with knowledge in aerodynamics asked why LaGG don't fly according to manual but waaay off like I said they got this as an answer.

And one more thing - we spent tremendous amount of effort that would create the most realistic FM, spend more stolkozhe on what would prove to freaks from sukhoi that it's actually realistic - do not intend, and do not have time for this, even if we wanted to.
We need to do a return and instruments, for example, it is more important to meet than complexes of a few nerds who can not even communicate normally.
Is that right?

And those nerds seems to actually know some aerodynamics.
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php%3Ft%3D81474%26s%3Deb39a9f6b1c178410 ae9b86463c22d82&usg=ALkJrhgFVMYbAoEaEVc5DYvGiTKvL_WbVQ

Yes, great FM you just have to trust them on that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKE-qeEO8EM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SveBPF6AN0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BguS-PzFuz4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI70E5BccYY

[MB_Avro_UK]

Accept it or reject it. We are all Flight Sim addicts. (Or perhaps junkies?).

Let's be grateful that we have sims to debate about. We are a niche brotherhood.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro

[=HH=Pauk]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_4la9qud58

[major_setback]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_4la9qud58

The pilot/crew ejecting/escaping himself/themselves from the aircraft at the end of the video looks good.

[pencon]

Hopefully there will be pilot in cockpit animations , At least a pair of arms moving the yoke

[Robert]

Hopefully there will be pilot in cockpit animations , At least a pair of arms moving the yoke

You mean in first person view? Not gonna happen. Jason or Loft stated as much. Personally I hope they never put arms or pilot in the cockpit.

[Feathered_IV]

They mentioned last week that AI crew will be visible in bombers and whatnot. Apparently they are animating their movements and reckon the results have been very good. Will have to wait for the Pe-2 in a few weeks to see for ourselves.

[Robert]

AI crew is fine with me. I just dislike first perspective view of a pilot in the pilot's seat. It obfuscates some dials and levers. They aren't necessary for me.

[zapatista]

The pilot/crew ejecting/escaping himself/themselves from the aircraft at the end of the video looks good.

i thought that looked pretty artificial and Disney-like. in RL it isnt really possible for the pilot to leisurely stand upright on the pilot seat with the canopy open at that airspeed, and for him to then jump several meters straight into the air as if he is superman

and looking at the near finished aircraft now being seen in that game promo video, most of the aircraft in that video also look pretty low detail and ill defined ( compared to what we already have in CoD and the DCS-p51) so much so that the il2 sturmovik's in RoF's BS look actually blurry.

compare that to CoD and DCS where the aircraft are present in such crisp high detailed you can actually count the individual rivets (and some people do :) ), and you can see the aircraft so realistically modeled that you feel you can reach out to touch them and know the texture and material of each component.
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachment.php?attachmentid=13985&d=1395502348


the overall impression from this RoF BS is rather "war thunder" and "Birds of Prey" like, with some new eye candy animations and visual effects added to provide some entertainment

Compare that to what this weeks new 4.3 "team fusion patch" continues to add to CoD (http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9362), this RoF BS doesnt even come anywhere near the current CoD state for quality or features :)

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachment.php?attachmentid=13986&d=1395502460

and new improved smoke and damage effects

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachment.php?attachmentid=13987&d=1395502741

easy choice really, CoD is miles ahead on all fronts, and yes that includes the eastern front :)

[arthursmedley]

The good news? We're gonna' have at least two top quality WWII combat flight sims and if Luthier can pull it off with his DCS effort, then we'll have three.:grin:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_J5JhIBVtI

[SlipBall]

[QUOTE=arthursmedley;515934]The good news? We're gonna' have at least two top quality WWII combat flight sims and if Luthier can pull it off with his DCS effort, then we'll have three.:grin:


That is the good that will rise from MG's ashes(very unfortunate), hopefully many new pilots to join our fun but serious genre

[ATAG_Bliss]

Looks like they have a long way to go on the MP front. They have reduced the MP servers to only 25 slots because of the lag and FPS issues.

Lets hope they get it sorted out.

[Feathered_IV]

Seems to have improved a bit after the first week. I missed the 100 player experiment they did the other day though. I notice the server list flickers a bit at the moment. Makes choosing a mission a sort of mini-game in itself!

[=HH=Pauk]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pq66zJ9k82A

[Feathered_IV]

Wow. Nice work! Your editing skills are fantastic.

[Feathered_IV]

Newest version of the clouds.

http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd119/Feathered_IV/Screenshot34812_zpsae49be8e.jpg

[SlipBall]

Newest version of the clouds.

http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd119/Feathered_IV/Screenshot34812_zpsae49be8e.jpg

They seem alright do you like them?

[Feathered_IV]

I do. I find they look a bit fuzzy in the details when you're right on top of them, but they move, and seem to go on forever with no pop up. It tried the current MP test missions with fairly dense cloud and they are a labarintine landscape in themselves. I'd been enjoying the Pe-2 bomber and its is great fun to sneak past flak and fighters on the way to a target, or fly half in/half out of the undercast.

[SlipBall]

That's great that you like the clouds I'm looking forward to trying the game on release

[Chivas]

I do like the look of the clouds. I haven't flown thru them yet and hope that an aircraft that your following disappears into them at a relatively realistic distance. Flying alone, I've found the clouds to be my friend, and used them quite often when necessary. Someone has said the AI can't see thru the clouds in ROF, so I'm hoping the same will hold true with the new BOS clouds, especially if a mixture of real players and AI can share the same online server.

[Feathered_IV]

I haven't been able to follow another aircraft through cloud and loose sight very quickly. It's true that RoF AI can't see through cloud, nor can searchlights and flak. I'll have to see if this holds true for BoS as well.

On recent questions regarding the current alpha clouds, the developer known as Zak wrote: "I don't have all the plans about weather right now, so unfortunately this questions will have to wait a bit. But I can tell that we already have 50 weather conditions sets and that's quite a lot, isn't it?"

[SlipBall]

I have heard recently no FMB for all?...that would hurt my score on positive reason's to buy the product :confused:

[bongodriver]

No FMB ,only available to an elite few who make missions for ROF, so you must have ROF to have any chance.

[zeus--]

I have heard recently no FMB for all?...that would hurt my score on positive reason's to buy the product :confused:

The game is still in development as well as the MB interface. It will be given after release.

No FMB ,only available to an elite few who make missions for ROF, so you must have ROF to have any chance.

This has nothing to do with owning ROF. They (777) have some ppl whom they can trust, and some of them are from RO community.

[Feathered_IV]

Maybe some hope after all:

"Zak, on 12 May 2014 - 20:39, said:

We do hear you asking for the MB. We will give it to players when it's ready. We can't make it possible sooner that it's planned (even extra money wouldn't help much since it's about vacant specialists, not about paying more to the existing ones)"

[SlipBall]

Maybe some hope after all:

"Zak, on 12 May 2014 - 20:39, said:

We do hear you asking for the MB. We will give it to players when it's ready. We can't make it possible sooner that it's planned (even extra money wouldn't help much since it's about vacant specialists, not about paying more to the existing ones)"


So MB is the new name for the old type IL-2 "FMB" ?...anyway its good that we will get it at some point

[Chivas]

As we know BOS uses the same FMB as ROF. The problem with the FMB is that its difficult to use, which garners alot of negative feedback for the sim. Which will draw less negativity, releasing the FMB as is, or not releasing the FMB, until its improved? The development is very wary of criticism, after watching the "criticism snowball" that "helped" kill the COD development. Not to mention IC will not suffer funding another long development, in a low profit niche market.

An FMB is crucial for the longevity and popularity of a sim. The development should invest the time and money to make the FMB more user friendly, but that can be very difficult when its invested all available funds in developing a working sim.

I think there is a chance for a better FMB if the sales of the initial release warrant further work on the sim, and they have someone in the development with the expertise to fine tune the FMB software.

[arthursmedley]

BoS at 50%.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YydshKWiJw

[Sokol1]

New trailer (is CGI).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXQc1lHlBDA

Sokol1

[WTE_Galway]

The development is very wary of criticism, after watching the "criticism snowball" that "helped" kill the COD development.



I would say more than helped.

I actually prepurchased COD and it is still unopened in the box. Never been loaded. Not because of any worries about the game but because by the time it turned up I simply refused to be involved in such a toxic community of negative entitled whiners.

Ironically I went to play EVE instead, a game renowned for its harsh community and found them much less negative than the COD crowd.

[VMFA-Blaze]

I have this game as well as Cliffs of Dover and in mho I really think that Cliffs has a far better game engine, in fact it's the best graphics of all of the simulators.

Leningrad does have a nicely contrived gaming experience but the cockpit graphics along with other things leave a lot to be desired..
I would much rather be flying the BF 109 in COD ;)...

I wonder if they'll actually ever get around to do something about this issue??

Blaze