Official Fulqrum Publishing forum - Answers to Community Questions

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)

- IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=189)

- - Answers to Community Questions (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=34680)

Hi luthier any chances you guys could look into the lack of 109 radiator drag and the same for spitfire open cockpits, thanks.

Also I heard that ships were still gravitating towards the moon ;) please look in to that.

One last thing is that the RC patch changed the lighting, it's too bright now for example look at the light cast by a gunsight bulb during the day!!!! Please review.

Thanks for your time, :D

Also one more thing, please look at the spit weathering, it looks like someone dragged it through a few hedges between the assembly line and the airfield ;)

Luthier, thank you for finally being honest about how bad you feel selling us this broken piece of software, its good you can laugh about it now and make jokes. Tell me how bad did you feel when you were faking all those video's pre release in order to convince us to buy a product that by your own admission you knew was not fit for purpose?

Quote:

Originally Posted by csThor (Post 465699)

You're joking, right? http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v5...oticon/wtf.gif You aren't really saying that CloD contains any offline and/or gameplay content worth the bits on my HDD?

As for the rest. Building a sandbox for the customers to play in is all fine and dandy if the karking thing had a solid fundament! In the current situation you're essentially saying "You want offline gameplay? Code it yourself." Yep! *shattering round of sarcastic applause* Brilliant. Marvelous. Sorry for the sarcasm overflow. I couldn't help myself at this apparent disregard of an entire slice of your community.

On a more serious note. Yes, the overwhelming majority of good offline content in 1946 came from external sources. But ... you know there was going to be a but ;) ... they had a solid fundament to build their campaigns on. There was a campaign module with rank system and medals (regardless how primitive), but CloD doesn't have any of that. Hence my "Code it yourself" statement. Well ... I can't code, programming languages don't make sense to me. Desastersoft did that, but they have their own style of campaigns and won't (for obvious reasons) release their campaign module for public consumption. Not that this would make much sense given the issues with the AI and the problems with player - AI interaction. Or has there been any addition to the radio menu with ground-attack options? Not? Oops!

So ... bottom line for me is that luthier apparently thinks that gameplay is a luxury and not needed at all. Interesting perspective, especially when you remember that Maddox Games wants to sell computer games. Unless, of course, MMO's are all you're interested in (what a coincidence, isn't it? :roll: ). I'll keep an eye on further developments, but I won't expect anything anymore. Have fun with your sandbox in which nothing but the usual clusterf*ck between fighters is possible. Too bad about the possibilities. *shakes head*

Well said and the sad truth. In the end IL2 will be one of this usual, boring arcade online clusterf*ck MMO's. The coop mode with all it's capabilities to stay ahead of the mainstream competition died tonight.

Maybe we are just too old and romantic csThor. ;)

This isn't rocket science ....

Quote:

Originally Posted by luthier (Post 465681)

Part II
I meant that it wouldn’t do anything for the bottom line, for sales.

Ever thought of boosting your bottom line by delivering a product that works?

Or by not delivering a prouct that you know doesn't work?

Either way is better than what you did.

Now those of us who spent good money for CoD wait to see how fair you will be with us when the (sight unseen) sequel hits the market.

.
I am happy with COD!
It could be better, yes but it is such a leap forward. Like the original IL2 was in the world of war flight simulations.
What is the difference between IL2 the original and IL2 COD... the subject IL2 original had a original subject that no had tried or touch before and it was therefore a instant hit. But and it is a big "but" COD is a air battle well covered by many games, books and movies so everyone think he is an expert or has is opinion.
Also when the game is more precise the gamer is more demanding. This is a game not reality! And never shall it be all games with ever his format pc or other has is restrictions, do not forget that the real Battle over Britain was a struggle to the 'death' this is not let us hope not!
For me the graphics are great!
The modeling of the planes far from perfect is near enough to make it a battle to prevail faced with mighty opponents!
I am waiting for the last and official fully tested patch and for the next (not sequel) game of the series, thanks.
:evil:
.
One last remark; for my PC this simulation did work (with very few exceptions) well or very well.

S!

Well, I liked these answers more. Honest and blunt. I hope the "Last Patch of CoD" will address critical issues so we can play meanwhile waiting for the sequel. Maybe should consider some DLC for CoD to get funds, like RoF. Sure has been discussed but still a viable option as there are things improving the game people would pay a small fee of. CoD is on the verge of greatness in many ways, just some issues keep it from reaching that yet. I hope the sequel restores the standard we were used to with IL-2 series before.

@ Tree UK

lol, ur bad .....

Good thing for us luthier is not the sort of gent to keep ill-gotten gains. No doubt in my mind we can expect free replacement DVD's the first week the sequel comes out.

Thanks for the time and support Luthier. I can imagine that it's not easy.

Serious question regarding tree collisions:

Often trees are grouped in clusters and forests, with a few standing alone. What if collision boxes were arranged such that an entire forest is covered by one box (or even just parallel planes like in 1946) . This would reduce the total number of boxes, saving FPS. The downside of course, would be more work on the map, fine-tuning these shapes.

Or, alternatively, each tree only has a 'trunk' collision region consisting of two crossed rectangles (four polygons max). Branches and foliage bend anyway, and many times aircraft have skimmed trees, taking branches home in the wheels or wings :cool: So, having branches clip through an aircraft might be acceptable.

Are any of these feasible?

Ease off a bit Tree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by luthier (Post 465508)

2. Will the terrible weathering on Allied aircraft be fixed?
It’s not terrible.

I'm afraid to say it is, truly terrible.
Something simple like this is for me a game breaker.

In a previous comment you say that you (and others) were fed up of seeing, and I quote

Quote:

Originally Posted by luthier (Post 465508)

We hated seeing horrible flat user-made skins everywhere in the original Il-2,so we settled on the technology that keeps the lower-end of the quality bar firmly set where no user effort can nudge it lower – even if that means also setting the ceiling for great skin makers.

but the 'thing' in this game is worse than anything I have seen in IL2,the effect is like a sandblaster from side on, with no working level of wear, just 100% full on.
I have never seen a photo of either a Spitfire or Hurricane (or for that matter any RAF aircraft) with anything even similar to the effect imposed on Allied aircraft in this game.

A little thing I know, but this along with the broken (with no intention of fixing it) coop channel map (the main reason I and many others bought the game in the first place) really puts me off.