That looks like my dog!!!
I've just had to check he's ok.. phew.. fast asleep in the hall..
You utter bastage by the way! :)

So you see: always switch off the ignition if you start a Spitfire's propeller by hand...

you're talking abt the plane... right ?

Come on Luthier!...give us a ray of Sunshine!
 

...tentatively ...any news on that magic 50% FPS Beta? ...:)

I don't remember any mention of a beta that will give the 50% FPS........they did say the final would give that.

I dont think we will get much info here mate, Luthier is posting on the sukhoi forum rather than here.

Come on Luthier. A quick news update please ;)

why???... we also purchased the Alpha

yeah but we're not worthy of their time, someone is too superior to waste time with us, but they like our money alright :rolleyes:

No one is pointing a gun at your head. If you don't like the service don't buy the product. :rolleyes:

You don't really see the service until you've purchased the product

S!

Well, CoD has been a bumpy road but I think eventually it will get there. And Battle For Moscow sure will help as it will bring in funds needed for further development. So I remain hopefull that IL-2 series will once again rise. RoF had it rough and now it is a totally different thing than when released so why would IL-2 not succeed as well.

Sure the development and these years we waited did NOT bring on the table what we expected from the previous work. But anyways improvements are coming so..

9 months after release and still no fsaa, thats shameful really its 2011 for godsake. They do not deserve any success in truth with any product.

S!

Tree, I play every game without FSAA as I do not need it..For me FSAA or lack of it is not a gauge of measuring the game quality. I could play with less fancy graphics if the core of the game was rock solid, like FM/DM etc. Future will tell what happens with IL-2 series..I for one do not wish it to fail as we have NOTHING compared to it except the original IL-2 series..and no other company is making a sim that can be taken seriously atm...

Seriously? I bet you've never tried RoF. Or A2A's FSX addons. CloD has a long way to go - in which I wish them good luck, I love this game and it has great potential.

RoF yes A2A seriously... Are they adding weapons now? Doubt it.

So there are no other ww2 fight sims... Simple FACT

At least you're honest about wanting to see them fail.

While I agree with you about potential, its totally unrealized. Its now clear to me that CLOD was just a cash booster to make way for the real game Battle for Moscow and to test the game engine out but make money doing it.
This would never have happened back when IL2 was IL2, now its a different animal and we are dealing with a company(s) that will release something saying its finished when they know otherwise.
I think reality shows the truth.

Your reading way to much into this. The new series is far more complex than the original series and they ran out of development monies before COD was finished. It was either release what was done or abandon the project. Battle for Moscow is totally dependent on the work being done on CODs AI, FM, DM, graphics engine etc. and hopefully its release will give the whole development another much needed infusion of cash. If the project survives you will see continual improvements in all aspects of all merged theaters from the Battle of Britain, Battle for Moscow, The Med, The Pacific, etc. Just as it was in the original series, and is still the business plan of the new series.

And that is good!, as the attention-addicts are stirring again.

C'mon Tree - just because you've had a few Friday beer it's not necessary to grow bitter again ;)

Look at a product like "Knights of the old Republic" with a budget that is probably x100 of CoD... No FSAA in the public beta last weekend. Amazing isn't it? And that's one of the most anticipated titles of 2011 with one of the fattest budgets...

A2A addons for FSX? A Ferrari that has been strapped on the roof of a rusty beetle that has got a new layer of cheapo spray paint? ;)

Pot calling kettle?

LMAO ...............he's watching us.

The A2A Spitfire with the Accusim stuff is actually a lot of fun and seems amazingly well modelled - even without guns that fire.

It may not be a WWII combat flight sim, but it's definitely a WWII flight sim. If you've never tried flying the A2A Spit and you have the chance to do so, you should. Might not be your cup of tea, but it's definitely an experience.

At the very least it'll make you wish the cockpits in CloD were that detailed and functional.

Never tried the A2A Spit. Is it totally accurate? As in, do you think you could actually start and run a real Spitfire after spending some time with the sim?

Yes

Sounds impressive, The 'inner geek' in me might have to check it out. :)

Seriously..it is 'that' accurate

Mixing action -> reaction?

And...your point?

S!

Should have added no WW2 sim in the works that challenges CoD..RoF is a good sim, never denied that and I own it as well :)

To be a WWII flight sim you would need a WWII map, environments and associated objects to fly in. I thought the A2A Spitfire whas just a plane. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, how does FSX go with thirty odd players go in the one map. WWII was all about formations of aircraft.

Both apples and oranges are very good but difficult to compare.

My understanding of the FSX and A2A spitfire is that you have a modern day flight sim with a WWII aircraft (very detailed) in it. But that does not make it a WWII Flight Sim.

Cheers!

Exactly, you can't expect the same level of detail on EVERY aircraft in CLoD. Then I'd probably be Battle of Britain - "Spitfire vs 109...and nothing else". You have to take in to consideration that CloD is a COMBAT flight sim and that it has many other parts of the game that need equal amount of attention as the planes. The A2A Spitfire guys only has to take focus on one single thing, the plane. No ballistics, no DM, A.I? etc. It surely is the most accurate Spitfire but that's all it is, one single plane. IMO.:grin:

After reading a bit the sukhoi forum, I see the light at the end of the tunnel. And maybe it is not the train :D.

I wish CrazyIvan were still around to help us with the translations, and everything else.

He was a good member of the community.

My last two cents..well..maybe 3...
First of all..there is a LOT I like about the game..the graphics are pretty stunning, the attention to detail is uncompromising..when sitting in the cockpit..no other game has ever reached this bar, and I do like the sounds. However, that being said..that is all well and good, but JUST eye candy, if the game itself does not run smoothly.
Robo mentioned NO game can run maxed out on computers made today..patently false, I can play crysis2 with Dx11 (much more taxing than Clods 9.0c) on my pc with all setting maxed, it plays wonderfully, Red orchestra 2 on all settings Ultra/war movie plays smoothly. So, that is just not true that todays pc's are incapable of running demanding games maxed out.
2. I have been playing flight sims since the days of the commdore 64 and the amiga..and have played probably every WW2 based since since then, so Im not new to flight sim. I am not "new" to this game..have been following its dev for the last 3/4 year when it was initially being worked on, and helped work on other games in Russia when I was living there, I bought this game when it came out..having seen it had been released in the UK first..with many problems, and thought sufficient time had passed to deal with them.

I have followed all the patches..technical threads, however, the bottom line is the game was/is just not what it was promised to be, and hearing a development team say they are reworking the entire graphics engine well after they have spent years on the game tells me someone got something very wrong. You dont spend 7 years designing and releasing a new Porsche then after its out on the market decide you need to rethink and replace the powertrain.
NOW, as a practicing attorney for last 25 years, I can tell you IMO the listing the recommended specs for this game as they were, and the minumum requirements borders of Fraud, thats just my opinion, others will disagree, but please unless you have a law degree and have practiced both criminal and civil law, your opinion may not carry much weight with me. Enticing others to buy a product by setting out min/recommended specs and then having the game fall short of even computers which exceed those guidelines IF nothing else is just ethically wrong. However, that is the world we live in today with software, and its not about to change THAT is the crux of my disappointment, I invest no small sum of cash in building a pc that should play this game effortlessly only to find out it does not, because somewhere along the line the developers decided the public was going to do the beta testing by means of general release, and we are the ones left holding the product which does not play as described, minus our money.
Those are my concerns, for now, the game gets shelved until something productive is released, and when Im flying in combat my FPS dont drop to 14, unacceptable.
Plenty of games being released every month, much more worthy of my time and money I hope, and I'll stick to those.

[QUOTE=ingsoc84;366989]My last two cents..well..maybe 3...

NOW, as a practicing attorney for last 25 years, I can tell you IMO the listing the recommended specs for this game as they were, and the minumum requirements borders of Fraud, thats just my opinion, others will disagree, but please unless you have a law degree and have practiced both criminal and civil law, your opinion may not carry much weight with me. Enticing others to buy a product by setting out min/recommended specs and then having the game fall short of even computers which exceed those guidelines IF nothing else is just ethically wrong. QUOTE]

Thank you good sir. thank you. its not the only area thats at fault though. however theres tom dick and harry that disagree and see nothing wrong. Tom is the developer, Harry is the 1C forum moderators and Dick is the fanboy that sees nothing wrong. but well said sir. my wavelength. ETHICS !

@ ingsoc84
agree 100% +1 :grin:

I fully agree with you, but so what? You gonna sue them? Who else if not an attorny with 25 years of practice in civil law?

Don't feed the the crystall ball.......;)

Lawyers, they'll sort it all out for us.........:rolleyes:

I'm not suing anyone, first you need DAMAGES..what are my damages? 50 dollars? not worth my time effort nor any other attorneys, it just isn't. Sue a Russian company? I lived there..there is NO rule of law there, its as corrupt as it gets, and leads the world as "the most corrupt Country", last year surpassing Zimbawe for that honor.As to the "so what aspect"..it just means "we got hosed" and have to live with it...and next time..LOOK before I leap purchasing one of these games, means I won't purchase till at least 6 months after the date, and have fully read the forums to discern whining from real complaints. As a final thought, so what does not excuse bad conduct on behalf of the dev's/publisher, but then..as most of us over 30 know...NOTHING in life is fair ;)

Before you dismiss attorneys as some sort of plague upon the world, I suggest you live in Russia two-five years, and see what a country is like that has NO legal redress for the citizens of the country, two extrems..the US and Russia..balance is needed for sure, but once you have lived and done business in a country void of any civil/criminal protections for people/business/instutions, you would understand why lawyers are necessary, AND the first person YOU will turn to when god forbid YOU should have a problem with the law.

Now, back on thread..is there ANY good news from the Russian sites?

There is one point people who endlessly bang on about the pre-sales hype compared to the released game always ignore when accusing the developers of fraud. I would not dispute that for whatever reasons or whoever was to blame the game was nowhere near as good as it should have been. But they are not a bunch of fly by nights who have trousered your 50 bucks and legged it. They are a group of dedicated enthusiasts who continue to invest considerable time and money to put things right. The game is already much improved and they have undertaken to continue the process. None of these updates have or will cost you anything. They will recoupe the outlay when the code is sorted and they can sell sequels.

The lawyers amongst us surely realise that you cannot sue unless you know who is responsible and that has never been clear.

If it is all really that bad I do not understand why people who feel so aggrieved continue to throw so much good time and effort after thier measly 50 bucks by being so negative on the forums and yet still perservering with the game. Could it be that they know perfectly well there is no alternative if they want a WWII flight combat sim? It seems like the only thing that matters is some point of principle.

It is like someone who has bought a house and found it has a major defect. The builder has agreed to demolish and rebuild it but all they care or complain about is that it can't be done in a month.

GET OVER IT...the development ran out of money and released an unfinished product, with the full intention of finishing and providing another ten years of new theaters.

Yes the developers could have let everyone know it requires a Cray computer to run it and its not as finished as we'd hoped. BUT there is a big problem with that......NO ONE WOULD HAVE BOUGHT IT....atleast not enough to sustain the development.

The developer hasn't taken the money and run, they are still working overtime to finish it for us and themselves.

This is a very small genre and there is NOBODY else doing complex WW2 aircombat sims. The developer is made up combat flight sim enthusiasts, like us, that deserve alittle slack.

Its only a few dollars of investment with the possiblility of years of entertainment, from a development group with a history of providing quality products. They ran out of money and we've picked up the slack with a tiny investment that could get them thru the finishing of the game engine until the sale of their next addon.

Yes Chivas, but they havent admitted that have they? Also the fact that you are still frantically defending them in general is sad.

Heliocon are you an online flyer or do you fly offline?

wtf does being a lawyer have anything to do with opinions in video games?

My two cents..

I had xp on a dual core and 3 gigs ram. Played the game and it crashed every 20 minutes.
I liked that 20 minutes so much i went out bought a I7 950 quad with 12 G ram with windows 7 and it runs beautifully and im getting every cent of my gaming dollar in spades.

The minimum specs are a fraud,a fraud that lured me into the best flight sim ive played.

Im a licenced pilot since 92 and a sim flyer from my commodore 64 till today. B17 bomber on intellivision before that!

Its never been better than this.I love the game.

Megahurt

[QUOTE=ingsoc84;366651]slight error there, but it undermines most of the basis of your argument. other then a couple of very brief sales from some retailers (see the dedicated thread), CoD still sells at full price in most countries. or you got a url for a bargain bin international sale where it is at 10 $ ? (if you do, i'll buy it now :) )

i did read the forums before buying it, and hence....... still havnt bought it ! my system is similar to yours (weak point being the 1 gb vram card), and having read the forums since its original release, and there STILL are still to many problems to expect a working product "out of the box". i simply dont have weeks of time to waste and try to twiddle with the fiddly bits to get it running wel enough to the point i can actually enjoy it. its almost there now, but not quite yet. having high hopes for the next patch if they rework the gfx engine as planned to get a decent boost in looks and speed. if all goes according to luthiers intentions, Santa might bring me some CoD (pun intended)

thats way to much balanced reasoning and common sense for this flightsim forum's usual crowd of spotty faced whiners of the "me wants it now, cause me wants it" generation. i demand you start ranting and raving with a few choice expletives thrown in so you can speak to them in their own language !

on a lighter note, there are already some good indications of the what our ugly little duckling is gradually turning into, if they get a few of the most current problems fixed (FM, AI, gfx engine performance). we could soon be back to some serious flightsim goodness to be enjoyed over many coming years.

your confusing oleg's BoB with the expected behavior from your local therapist who is there to massage your fragile ego on a weekly basis and help you manage all the perceived insults you experience while traveling through a meaningless life that contributes nothing to the well being of mankind or your own eternal salvation.

in case you really did fail to comprehend Chivas's point: for whatever multitude of reasons, we ended up with the choice of either no BoB/CoD flightsim, or the release of an unfinished beta product that will eventually develop into a fully fledged ww2 flightsim (containing many of the components and elements many of us have dreamed over for the last 10 years)

for most long tern ww2 flightsimmers, the choice between those 2 options was simple, no matter how frustrating it is/was to still have to wait longer.

Actually Luthier did admit the problems, and yes, I do defend them with some common sense, to offset some the opinions of the doom and gloomers. We need to attract simmers to the genre not drive them away.

S!

Isn't he the same guy running under name IvanK?

[QUOTE=Ali Fish;366994
Thank you good sir. thank you. its not the only area thats at fault though. however theres tom dick and harry that disagree and see nothing wrong. Tom is the developer, Harry is the 1C forum moderators and Dick is the fanboy that sees nothing wrong. but well said sir. my wavelength. ETHICS ![/QUOTE]

Ali, there's little anyone can say against insoc84's and some others' basic arguments but lets just clarify the 'fanboy' issue because it gets very tedious.

No-one on these forums is saying there is nothing wrong and that the game is complete and fantastic.

Some of us are saying that what we see and can run looks good, is playable, is enjoyable, is already an improvement on IL-2 (in some opinions) and will be great once its been re-built (because that's what's going on). We say that because that's the way we find it. We know some people can't run it and that there are major problems but we believe they will be fixed in time.

If that is a definition of fanboy I have no problem being called one and yes I have been a fan of Maddox Games for about ten years now. But if fanboy is supposed to describe someone who blindly pours adulation on CoD and thinks there's nothing wrong with it then I can't remember any posts that would fall into that category.

Some people can't get over the fact that the game was released before it was ready, can't accept the current situation and that CoD needs to be re-built in some major areas.

Someone experiencing CoD for the first time has every right to post a complaint or two but, looking in the opposite direction to 'fanboy', what has gone way beyond tedious are the guys that keep repeating the same old arguments as if their only purpose in life is to undermine CoD because they have spent $50, can't accept the situation, can't let go and want to see CoD 'punished'.

You might wonder why those people hang around the forum if they think so little of CoD and its future.

Good post...

And again, I fully agree with you. My reply was intentionally a bit heretic ;) Being far over 30 I remember those days when outstanding companies like MICROPOSE released games in nearly flawless condition. Do you remember this one ?


But nobody should believe that this is impossible today. Last week my nephew indicated that he would appreciate to get a copy of SKYRIM on Santa Claus. Due to my experience with Silent Hunter V and later on IL2 Cliffs of Dover I denied to buy a game released without a playable demo. Knowing that he is a little nag I decided to download Skyrim illegally and crack it first of all. I played around for about 1 hour with a system that was far below the minimum requiments provided by Bethesda. What should I say; it worked flawless, smooth with stunning graphics even with a 8800GTS and NO crashes.... Ten minutes later I ordered two copies from Amazon.

That's what I learned. Do I feel bad ? No way....

Icebear I suggest you read the forum rules before you post again.

I just want to report in that with my 'medium' system I'm running Cliffs of Dover just fine, without any crashes or stutters and decent framerate ( ~ 30 - 35 or so )

http://i584.photobucket.com/albums/s...n/4ac4818f.jpg

My ingame settings are on normal/high. Everything from shadows,plane details damage ect. on high, but land detail is on normal.

I don't fly over london often as I'm a fighter but over the English coastal airfields and over the German fields in France my game is keeping up good. An increase in FPS is always welcome of course! But people claiming that this game is utterly broken can't be right.

No contesting the forum rules (rules are to be complied... at least in most cases :P) or the work moderators have enforcing these rules. But this guy deserves a big ~S~ for not being an hypocrite. ;)

Regards.

No quick return on $50 investment? Of cause it is a tragedy!
...if you live in Africa, Afghanistan or maybe Eastern Europe?

No candies now but only in 1-2 years? WTF! I can not handle it like a man!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YQpbzQ6gzs

PS. BTW BF3 crashes more often than CloD on more systems (e.g. factory overclocked 560ti anyone?) and not compatible with more software like OSD displaying one. Origin disconnects players from servers more often than Steam. Facts learned form reading Battlelog support forums searching for crash solutions. BF3 is more expensive than CloD, had a much better budget and is still better designed than MW3 in spite of all the problems (which also means that MW3 is much worse investment than CloD was). We have to switch to consoles if we are not prepared to happily wait for a long-long time till alpha-beta releases are fixed. So called Permanent Beta is a new industry trend.

Why is a guy posting here who hasn't even been bothered to purchase the game, surely his opinion is worth nothing??

Excellent post Ataros. I subscribe to the permanent beta concept. But ... it has to be declared as a Beta, otherwise it's simply a lie to raise money to allow (hopefully) to correct the bugs. Another kind of business, it looks to me.

"If something is worth doing, it is worth doing badly"

Insuber

What Chivas and Ace of Aces said.

Sadly guys like you are considered liars around here by the squeaky wheel whiners.. Where as I for one see your post as just another example of how the PC itself is the root of most of the problems people are having with CoD.. Which is not surprising what with all the potential interaction of software and drivers out there.. It is for those very reasons why things like XBOX and PS3 are surpassing PCs for the gaming market.

My machine is far lower in spec than the one Sven has and I can run the game just fine on fairly high settings. (Not going to fire up the game right now to check them all but I have SSAO on as well as grass, roads, etc...) And I am running at 1920 X 1080 resolution.

Core2Duo E8500 @ 3.5ghz

6 gigs DDR 2

Win7Pro 64bit.

EVGA GTX 570 Superclocked 1.280 gig VRAM

Soundblaster Fatality Gamer sound card.

Gigabyte EP45-UD3R mobo

@ElAurens - FYI I did a very interesting test when I upgraded my rig...

My old rig had a E8400 Core 2 Duo @ 3.3 Ghz with a GTX275 card. When I got my new rig (see sig) I tried to use the GTX580 in my old rig and saw minimal improvement in the FPS. Then in the new rig I got almost double FPS... Judging from that I think your GTX570 may be severely hampered my your CPU if that holds for your config too. Se this thread where I posted my results:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=22448

Did you have Windows XP in your old rig?

I'm sure my older Core2Duo is a bottleneck, but there is no way I'm building a new rig in the forseeable future with things in the real world the way they are.

1+

I had a simular experance.. I was running a GTX280.. and CoD ran fine.. But I thought what the heck, it is an older vid card, so I upgraded to the GTX570 and to be honest.. Did not see that big of an improment either!

On that note, my MB did have an issue awhile back.. my USB 3.0 ports seemed to have died.. So my MB is a little suspect.. I was thinking of getting a new MB but keeping the rest.. Any recomendations?

Here is my current config

S!

Aces, the Intel X58 chipset is still going strong so I would say get a new one. I had an Intel's own X58 board and it was rock solid and thus I never overclock the lack of such options never bothered me on that board.

Thanks for the info! S!

I was this close to getting the Intel MB when I got this EVGA.. In retro I wish I would have ! ;)

S!

EVGA should be a good brand too. I think Guru3D has some reviews and comparisons on X58-chipsets and others HERE , take a look :)

i installed and tried to run CoD about 4 months ago on my intel i5 @ 3.5 ghz (dual core only), 4 gb ram and ati 5770 (1 gb vram) video card and it was pretty much unplayable with most settings at medium (rez 1920 x 1200 on a 27' dell).

comparing that to what it looks like on a friends pc with i5-2500k with 8 gb ram and a 2gb vram recent nvidea card, the difference was huge, he had fairly decent game play (but still some micro stutters over land and big cities, or when having grass on etc). he also still had occasionally some ctdt and lockups

have you noticed a major level of improvement on your system in the last 4 months to the point it now runs that well for you ? (on your mid level pc, which is similar to mine). i have kept a monthly eye on the main forums to see what improvements people are reporting from recent patches, and have mostly still seen similar complaints (with maybe a 30% improvement in performance, which still doesnt make it worthwhile retrying on my system imo).

to have a decent chance to run it i think i need at least a quad core (even if at similar speed to my current cpu), a 2gb or more video card, and about 8 gb of ram. thats a big upgrade for something that should run ok on my current pc if they solve the main bugs.

Zap, did you disable the ubi splash video? Some ATI cards are clocked down to 600 MHz by that .avi.

Cheers,
Insuber

You say you installed CLOD a few months ago but below in this post you say you haven't purchased the game?? Which one is it or have you got a touch of the Luthiers??

You might be surprised now. The CPU doesn't seem to be a bottleneck in CoD, unlike IL-2 '46. My quad core i7 950 runs at around 30% usage. Your RAM may be borderline in the sense that I see around 2.8Gb when in the cockpit but the memory leak makes it climb to 5.2+ Gb over about 1.5 hours when it crashes so you may crash a little earlier. And as insuber says, kill that Ubi logo.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-JuaxbjZa5E...acepalmsup.jpg

zapatista, zapatista.... don't say you have a pirated version maybe??? :rolleyes:

I agree that it has to, but thinking realistically how can it be even possible in the real world? Luthier - 1C, Oleg - 1C, 1C - UBI contracts all have/had non-disclosure clauses. Luthier mentioned in March or April something like please do not ask me questions answering which would get me fired the next morning. Yes, theoretically UBI could announce it as beta but we do not know if retailers or Steam would accept a beta. Thus it probably was a "stop-loss" decision to release it as it is (having an alternative to shut the project down completely).

My understanding is that new engine with too many features, too much detail and new technology exponentially increased workload and required resources which was not accounted for because no one attempted similar titanic projects in the past. (Think about why none of studios in more technologically and financially developed western countries never created anything comparable in complexity and detail in air- or even land- or sea-sims.)

Oleg accepted that he made several mistakes in the beginning of development trying to make a perfect product.

There is nothing we can do about this reality besides investing more money in MG, or applying for job with MG if we are good, or advertising CloD to friends and online buddies on other forums, or encouraging the team to overcome difficulties with our support, trust, positive and constructive attitude on the forums. Luthier said in March that they need our support and trust to break through (as they have to fight for continuation of financing by publishers I think. Oleg mentioned on his Youtube channel last spring just after the release "... if they allow the team to finish...") .

Psychologically people often feel better when publicly blaming others, busting and bitching. Internet forums is a perfect place for this. People are not stupid not to realise that their bitching discourages the team, newcomers and even investors/publishers who read these forums, therefore harming further development of the product, but keep doing it because it makes them feel better. Perfectly understandable. I did it several times on sukhoi.ru forums too.

PS. If you want continued support for the series, please help the devs every day in proving to publishers that this is a great product worth continuing investing. If you do not what further development but just a revenge you can do the opposite and be happy when the project is shut down coming here to say "I told you that it was crap!".

Good post Ataros.

Well said, Ataros!

While i agree on the rest of your post whole heatedly the quoted bit i think is obscure and I cant agree, low market sales stops the game from being supported. The game having such a slow fix rate keeps the sales low, thus less funding from publishers, resulting in the demise of a game.

How exactly do you recommend we prove to the publishers this product is great. The Publishers don't care if this game is any good they just care for getting the investment back.

I've bought this game twice and recommended it to 3 friends who bough it too, short of that I'm not sure what you expect people to do.
The responsibility of this has always been on MG and will always been on MG to make things better, and that's what they pay their employees to do.

Ataros, first of all, let me say that your post is perfect for eloquence and clarity. Then, to confort my words, I'm the guy who last week purchased 35 USD of RoF planes, despite that I never fly RoF. It was just because Jason wrote me a mail asking for financial help to continue the development next year. He deserves it, so I forked out my hard earned. And I'm not alone.
I will continue to do the same with CloD, and buy whatever they sell, but ... If the relationship changes from customer of a finished product, to sponsor/financer/promoter of a promising project, then the consequences must be assumed by both parties.
Among those consequences, communication and transparency are paramount. The sponsors have right as a minimum to a certain clarity on the plans and on the status of the works. More communication, to keep motivation and build trust. This is not the case today.
Hopefully the arrival of B6 in this forum will cover for this lack and reconstitute some of the lost trust.

Have a great day,
Insuber

PS: as far as promoting, actually I am the only one of my squad flying regularly CloD in ATAG, and my squad mates look at me like a bit eccentric pilot ...

Good post Ataros.

While Sales or potential Sales might be the thing that finally decides 'live or die' we can at least, on these forums, support and encourage the project to make it clear to the distributor that there is a market for it which will grow once the problems are sorted out. We all know guys that are holding back until they are. And we can support the devs who, I believe, have more than just the 1C/Ubi investment at heart. Their own enthusiasm for the project must add something to their pay.

S!

Shelled out some hard earned to Rise Of Flight as well during sale. Bought missing planes and some field mods on top of it. We have very few combat oriented flight sims out there and situation is not getting any better in the future so supporting those that are good.

So if CoD and it's sequels need support for sure will, but then again in return ask for more communication. This has been improved with BlackSix arriving on the scene so a clear improvement over the less frequent blurps of information we got. So going to the better slowly but steady.

Well said, now this part that has been mentioned is the sole upmost aspect to gain trust, support etc for this and any other title that is and has been crippled as much as this one...end off

To this day nothing has changed on that front but hopefully it will soon, time will tell.

Sorry I did not mean my entire post to be a reply to you personally but only the 1st paragraph. I agree with you and wish things could be better. I disagree with those who can not handle their negative emotions and bring them here to public again and again and again because this is destructive for the project.

777 is a privately owned business as far as I understand, 1C is a relatively huge corporation. What possible for 777 is not possible for 1C which is sad. Oleg had the courage to take responsibility and say about the project whatever he thinks because IL-2 was his child and he could not be just fired because he said something shareholders would not like. But now he is gone from this business. Maybe luthier can stand up and take responsibility for sincerely telling the community everything he thinks... but would community benefit if he looses his job because of crossing the line and telling too much about the reasons of bugs, etc.?

I did not get an e-mail from Jason btw (maybe I have to much RoF planes already :) ) and I am not going to their forums bitching about discrimination and bad customer relationship management but just assume that the mail got lost somewhere in spam filters (however I got a receipt for the purchase I made after reading the message on the forums).

Some people do not understand what is constructive and what is destructive, do not understand if they bring good or bad to the community and to the project. Thanks God, this is not a life or death issue.

$50 is nothing compared to what Oleg had to go through if you think about it btw.

EDIT: Regarding international community manager position, I asked luthier several months ago if they have such a vacancy. IIRC he replied that 1C marketing department was being downsized at that moment and people were fired. If I got it right, BlackSix's primary role is 1) mission design for BoM (because he used to work in MG at the same position in the past), then 2) managing community projects on creation of Operational Manuals, Mission-designers reference book, etc. (which the international community will benefit from) using the convenience of local forums where BlackSix is a member for 11-years (yes before original Il-2 release), and only then 3) answering some questions on the forums.

BTW UBI has the international marketing budget (which an international community manager should be paid from) because they are the publisher outside Russia but not the 1C. 1C has the marketing budget only or Russia being the publisher only for Russia and can pay for community manager only for Russia (English-speaking people are much more expensive here.). Theoretically money 1C spends on maintaining international forums is a good will only and responsibility of UBI imo.

Well.. depends on the definition of beta

The two main areas being bugs and features

Some people define 'beta' as software released with a 'bug' in it.. Which is not only un-reasonable but flat out silly! Because by that definition most if not all software is beta, because most if not all software has bugs in the initial release. With that said not only is CoD excluded from being called beta for that reason, but all software is excluded from being called beta for that reason.

Some people define 'beta' as software not including all the features advertised on the box.. But in light of the fact that nothing was advertised that we did not receive also excludes CoD from being called beta.

Anyone that has had any experience with 1C previous flight sim, i.e. IL-2 knows that over the course of 10+ years 1C has provided several 'PAID' for 'upgrades' to IL-2 that include new features, maps, planes etc.. And during that same time 1C has provided 'FREE' updates that not only patched/fixed bugs but also added new features, maps, planes, etc.. Which is practically un-heard of in the PC gaming market!

Problem is a lot of people got 'use' to this 'GREAT' support (set the bar high) and receiving 'FREE' stuff such that now when 1C is struggling to tie up all the loose ends most of these spoiled people are now looking like the mob in an old Frankenstein movie and picking up torches and pitch forks and heading to 1C (virtually) to string Oleg up

So, in a weird sort of way, 1C caused this 'ungratefulness' problem by giving away what most flights sims (like RoF) charge $ for.

Sad but true

Agreed 100%!

We have all had our moments where we vent in frustration.. But identifying the problem should not be confused with an excuse for the problem.

Mhm...

Beta is needed to find hidden bugs that developer can't easily find.
For example my RL job is to follow the develpment of an application for an industry:
1- Developing: I write the code.
2- Alpha state: I test the application myself.
3- Beta state: I give the application to a industry's guy. He do his tests.
4- Releasing: If the guy say it's OK then the application is released.

Alpha is different from Beta because the develper usually "think" as a developer. He test the application by his logic. Instead the Beta is used by the real customers and a lot of time the customers are "stupid" (logically speaking).. for example they press a key that they don't have to press until something is inserted; the developer is aware of this logic and misses the bug that is going to be found by the customer.

Then it's a problem about resource: the application has a exception that it's thrown if the number of users is over 30 (for example, related to CloD, the bug appear during a multiplayer mission). How can the developer be aware of that bug during the Alpha state?

A) If a software has some hidden bugs inside it does not mean that it's an Beta. It's a bugged sofware.

B) If the software has A LOT of hidden bugs then it's a Beta.

C) If the software has A LOT of hidden bugs and CLEAR and VISIBLE bugs then it's an Alpha.

To which section does CloD belong?

Note I said..

Which is not to be confused with me saying that is the definition of 'beta'

To make it more clear I should have said..

Better?

No brainer: C

That is why this game is going to take a long, long time to fix.

Really?

So if it is that crystal clear.. Than it should be a simple case for you to list all the CLEAR/VISABLE bugs.. Right?

With that said.. Can you provide a few examples of CLEAR/VISABLE bugs that IYHO would qualify calling CoD 'alpha'

Just so I can see it from your point of view in the hopes we can all be on the same sheet of music here

Just for starters:

No functioning antialiasing alone is reason enough to call this software alpha quality. Terrible AI, rewriting the graphics engine and no DX 11 as promised also make this software alpha quality. It is promising alpha software, but that is all right now.

There are also too many bugs listed on this forum for me to bother to repeat.

Clear as crystal to me.

If a software is Beta, Alpha or Release code it is pretty well known there are still possible issues you will have using it.

Well.. not based on Maus's definition of beta.. If I am reading Maus's definition correctly, to qualify as 'alpha' the 'bug' would have to be CLEARLY a bug.. That is to say it does not work as 'expected' by the programers logic..

Correct me if I am wrong, but that 'feature' was disabled by 1C prior to release, thus the programer disabled it, thus the programer would expect it to be disabled. Thus it is working per the programers loigc and thus not a bug

No, that does not count as a bug.. Not only is this not CLEAR but it is very subjective! That is to say ask 10 people what they think about the AI in CoD and your likly to get 10 differnt ansiwers.. which is not CLEAR by any definition

No, that does not count as a bug.. Because the developer decided to 'upgrade' something does not mean it is a bug

DX 11 was never advertised (aka promised).. Only DX11 API support was advertised and CoD dose make use of the DX11 API, so the is not a bug

As I half expected.. You could provide no CLEAR/VISABLE bugs

And many like you.. Problem is upon closer inspection it is more myth than fact