He he, there is also something called "gold plating" regarding software development... That is when a developer puts down way to much time on some insignificant thing and makes it perfect beyond the demands of the customer while they miss doing a lot of other rather easy stuff that are important for the customer...

We have cockpits that are clickable which only a few percent of the users will use more than a few times (Olegs own words) - while we don't have force feedback which is a major issue for a good percentage of the core users, horrible input mappings etc... It sure will be fixed but it hurts seeing the control settings pages for a game of this calibre.

Still - as a software developer myself I can imagine the horror of tracking down bugs in a piece of software this complex where you don't know the hardware it will run on, or driver versions etc... As it is now it really is getting really enjoyable even on old mid range computers like mine (new one will be ordered when a bonus lands in two weeks).

Regarding bugs and bad performance... Just look at this video I did last night on my 4 year old computer (Core 2 Duo E8400@3.3 - GTX275 - 6GB memory and W7x64):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVw0pPopaQQ

That is with the latest patch and the nossao mod, I have no complaints about the performance there...

The vid looks good - now what the irony here is that if its running well on that rig but someone with a far better rig (this applies to anything since whats high end soon becomes mid etc) does not see any improved performance, that is very worrying. How is performance around buildings, or with many planes in the air?
The reason the ssao off helps is because you are on a 275gtx, which is old dx10 hardware (its not dx10.1) which uses an updated shader and lighting pipeline very similar to DX11 (Shader model 4,4.5,5) while dx10 uses a pipeline closer to DX9 I believe (Shader model 2.0,2.5?,3.0).
The way it manages rescources is different, 10.1/11 brings a big performance boost if you run on more than 2 cores.
They are stuck in a tech rut...

Also your criticism of the nit picky perfectionism I think is 110% on the spot. You hit the nail on the head, they have focused alot of energy into perfectionism and very niche (within the already small niche) features instead of investing in the infastructure.

You have a source for this? I seem to recall Luthier (or perhaps Oleg) saying that they only had one programmer working on a particular aspect of the sim, but that isn't the same thing at all. Yes, it is a small team, but throwing extra man(person?)power at a problem is often not the best way to produce efficient code. Anyway, regardless of who is doing what, either the core of the sim is right now, or it never will be - and from what I've seen, it doesn't look far off, in spite of the problems.

I made a mistake here, they do have more than 1 programmer so my apologise for posting that info as it was not true. I misrememberd a post by Luthier which said: "3. We continue to optimize the game. Our chief programmer - the optimizer is sick the third day, but it does have a concrete plan of work, which again is in a fairly short period of time will improve the framerate. Wonders of course we do not promise, but the flight over the landscape will be dramatically different than the flights have to water."

I normally would ammend my original post by adding this but as to not cause confusion (since you already quoted me) I removed the comment to prevent further confusion.

IMHO, I got Call of Juarez 2 (BiB) based on the original. Little did I know I was getting a console port which had essentially removed all of the features which made me enjoy the original.

To make matters worse, there is a certain level where you get shot through the back of the carriage - I tried it several times - each time three shots through the back wall (no chance to fire back). To make matters worse, they essentially removed the ability to handle saved games...

No problem, Heliocon - with all the information (and misinformation) we've been getting, it is easy to get confused. The 1C:Maddox development team is small, and this does cause problems, I'm sure - but so do large teams. This isn't just confined to software production of course - basically, once you get beyond the point where everyone can see what everyone else is up to, you have to employ more and more effort on coordination, and less and less on creativity. I suspect a bigger development team would have worked quicker, but come out with something with less potential for long-term expansion. Time will tell though...

Yes, they didn't had only one programmer, they actually had two of them. Have a look at the credits in the Extra section of the IL2 CoD's game menu.

Exactly. In most contractual business situations there are deadlines to be met. I highly doubt that any investor would agree to a six year long development. My guess is that the deadlines were not met a couple of times by Maddox Games.

Blaming UBI is easy, but it's also getting very old.

Also "the small team argument" is totally invalid, since the game's price is exactly the same as any other AAA titles from major software studios. And the price is the ULTIMATE factor for ANY product. You can't sell Hyundai's priced as Ferrari's and expect people to be happy about the performance of the former.

Interesting nugget/article here: http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost...4&postcount=28

New patch they offloaded textures to another core to greatly improve performance, just keeping a record here ;)