Really surprised by th number of 50 especially given the amount of work that anybody that has eyes can see has gone into creating this game.... Wtf.

Well maybe when we have Spitfires and Bf-109s that don't sound identical to each other people might change their mind. ;)

The game is complete in terms of the aircraft included, but you can't say the terrain, coast, the skies and clouds, the sounds and not to mention the water in the channel itself is 100% finished and polished. Not to mention a complete lack of ships for anti-shipping missions.

And lordy don't start with the bugs!

I'm giving it a 70.


Immersion-enhancing features: I'm almost completely satisfied with the overall graphics quality, in terms of what needs improvement new sounds and an AA fix are in the pipeline.

Cosmetic features: No need for them. A cosmetic feature is actually an immersion enhancing feature that's been taken too far, usually to the detriment of other aspects of the sim. Graphics and sounds are important to create immersion in a realistic manner, not movie-like effects in an arbitrary one.
In other words, i like pretty pictures too but i don't consider graphics and sounds alone to be the most important part of it: on their own they would only give us an arcade game with aircraft, not a combat flight sim.

Under the wrapping (the important, yet easy to notice parts): The aircraft fly in a believable manner and the damage model is well researched, detailed and progressive (fires spreading, secondary failures, etc). Bugs exist that need to be fixed and some tweaking is needed, we've got some already in previous patches so i'm optimistic the rest will come.

The meat of it all: This is actually things that most people fail to notice, or completely lack the imagination to foresee what can be done with them. The amount and quality of stuff that can be done with the support for scripting in missions is insane, not to mention the support for directly integrating custom-made modules in the sim with their own interface. Sadly, many are too hung up on carrying over their old IL2 habits and miss these capabilities, or confuse legitimate features for bugs, but we'll gradually get there.

Long story short, i would give it an 80 if not for the existence of bugs that affect actual gameplay, that is flying the planes and doing what they are supposed to be doing, otherwise it runs pretty enough and stable on my two year old PC already, it's the gameplay issues that i'm after currently.

These bugs would drop my rating between 65-70 but i'm cutting some slack and giving it a 70 because of all the cool stuff that most people routinely fail to notice while they are focusing on issues that have already been done to death :grin:

70 - the best I can give it right now.

Waiting patiently for the patch ;)

70... i can enjoy the sim, but only as an "over the channel 6x6 skirmish generator".

I gave it a generous 60. Clod is still a weird mix of obsessive detail, placeholders and broken features.

This poll is going to be a great snapshot of the current build. Will be interesting to see how it compares this time next year.

I don't think anyone underestimates the work that has already gone into it, that is clear for anyone who stops and thinks about it. The poll is more a reflection of how well we think it is working at the moment.

There's probably about 10-15% more work required (a pure guess) from the last patch and when its all done that should take the poll from an average 60 to 90+. Well, we expect it too before they stop work on CoD (the first release of "SoW"). Future 'parts' of SoW will benefit from most of the core work done on CoD so hopefully will be much less painful.

I gave it a 50.Some parts of it ARE brilliant, such as the cockpits,but its obvious there is a lot to be done, and everything just feels so 'clunky' now, GUI, multiplayer, even the QMB is not as good as il2. If I didn't know it was made by MG/1C I would think it was made by another company.
Lets hope we can improve on the scores after the next patch.

I scored it a 60, for now.

The meat of the game is present. There is so much attention to detail and so much obvious painstaking research and commitment to delivering an authentic WW2 simulator that it's mind-boggling. When I'm up there flying, I'm pretty immersed by the whole experience.

But you can't ignore it's shortcomings at present either. It's very, very unpolished at present, and whether it's a sim or not, made by a small team or not, it has to be compared to other video games out there.

That is the way I approached this thread... I totally understand the circumstances and challenges in creating a product like this in this market, but many people, many of whom are not hardcore simmers, will pick up this game and simply want to fly without hassle.
Without the much-needed polish, much of the true genius of this game will go unnoticed by many.

That's up to you tiger, its a personal score.

I will do another in 6 months and we can see where we are then.