Cliffs of Dover Is The Best. But Some Of You Don't Appreciate It.
 

Hi all,

The title says it all. But I will add the following.

The problem is that many of us do not have systems that can manage the demands of Cliffs of Dover. That is NOT the developer's fault.

Yes, there are some teething problems, but nothing in comparison to the vast complexity of this production.

I have difficulty flying at low level over land. That is because my system is not powerful enough. So, I fly over the sea or over land at 7k meters. Problem solved!

Today, I flew along the south coast of England from Dover towards the West. I know this area quite well. The ground detail and accuracy is AMAZING! And just as important, I felt as though I was flying in an aircraft. I have never flown a WW2 fighter but I have a light aircraft (GA) pilot's qualification and also flew professionally in Royal Navy aircraft.

The summer haze over the Channel is magnificently represented.

This simulator is the future and it's here now.

And I use the word simulator and not game.


Here's my specs:

Windows 7 64 bit
AMD Phenon 9500 Quad Core
8 Gb RAM
Nvidia GeForce 9800 GT

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

Blah, Blah, turn you damn fanboyism off.

It's definately the devs fault that the engine doesn't make use of the full hardware power, even if there's plenty.

I appreciate Cliffs of Dover, but I won't give a free pass on the devs for releasing an alpha game. I am sure you think CloD is the best, but you are super minority here.

This kind of fanboy post is just as annoying as end of the world hater posts.

I have 2X HD6970 2GB GPUs and they can't be used because the devs cannot get it working.

I have a quad core CPU and CoD is not taking full advantage of it. Yes multi CPU support is improving but still not as good as it should be.

I have an FFB joystick (G940) and the devs elected not to have FFB support.

Each of these is considered close to top of the range as far as current hardware is concerned. Yet CoD doesn't take advantage of it. So I'm sorry but MANY of us DO have systems that can handle CoD but it still doesn't use them to their fullest.

Frankly, I am sick of hearing people tell me it is your poor system that's the problem. You must be kidding when you say it is our fault for not flying over the sea or at 7,000 metres when you go over land... erm what if I want to take-off and land?

Have we really reached the stage were CoD apologists are now telling us to fly high to avoid low FPS. It's a hypothetical question, no need to answer.

Accurate? It's beautiful, but accurate? In general terms maybe, but where are the south-coast piers? Where is Pevensey Castle? Where's the Observatory? Where's the White Man of Wilmington? All significant navigational features, all missing. And I'll have missed many others I know nothing about.

Stonehenge is there though, unless it was somebody having a laugh with a bogus screenie.

Hi all,

I'm not a fanboy. I speak my mind.

Would you have preferred that this sim had not been released?

Such negative replies. You can't see the piers? Well,well, my my! End of civilisation as we know it.

Look at the positives and to the future. And if you think you can produce something better...go ahead and do it.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

Definately not in this status.

Well said.

The problem is, that the code is not polished. That has nothing to do with nay-sayers or whining. It's a fact. And I have strong doubts that this is the fault of the customers. So if it's not the customers and not the developers, maybe some Gremlins wrecked the code so they had to release it with 50% of the features disabled because they are not working correctly?

And then there would be whining about it not being released soon enough.


Conveniently forgotten the countless threads demanding every minute little detail have we.


And no, he is not a super minority.


Except how it is or move on, freeking simple really.

I like CoD. I really do like it. But as playing at the moment is a bit frustrating (not only due to performance issues, but also due to the relatively unstable multiplayer and the virtually non-existant quick missions) I took the chance to finally buy RoF. Never had the chance before as my system is relatively new (half a year). Furthermore I got my TrackIR just last week and I really didnt want to play RoF without it.

Well, as I said. I really do and want to like CoD but the comparison to RoF ist just hurtful. I do know that Rise of flight hat its problems in the beginning but at least it feels like a game. I am pretty sure that the programmers of CoD had a reason for using these windows popups and stuff but it just feel cheap in a way. RoFs UI is just so much more intuitve and well designed it's almost unbearable. Not to mention the existance of a good quick mission editior, tutorials and so forth.

For example: When I first heard of the possibility to configure the ammo belts in CoD I imagined some nice designed menu where you drag and drop beautiful drawed bullets in a cool animated ammo belt. What did we get? A simple, boring menu. The funny thing is, even the functional menu of the former Il2 games are so much superior to what we have now. I just don't get it.

I really am quite sure that CoD is a diamond in the rought but it just doesn't feel like a game at the moment. It's more a cluster of ugly windows and menus which (admittedly) lead to a great simulation with a great damage model and flying immersion. I have bought CoD and hope that this investment will pay off eventually but I also think that there is no use in persuading myself that the game is great when it clearly is not. At least at the moment and in its current state.

The badly flawed and unbelievably poorly researched flight models are a deal breaker for me. Its not even close to being ready for release as a Battle of Britain simulator.

U forgot the charts to back your "claim"

Such a poor argument, the old if you think you can do better then go ahead retort. Have you ever been to the cinema to watch a movie and thought that sucked? Surely by your logic then you could go and make a better movie. Have you ever been to a restaurant for an expensive meal and thought that was awful? Then go and make a better gourmet meal for loads of people at a restaurant. Have you ever purchased any item or paid for any service that was sub-standard at best or at worst a total rip-off? Then go and do it better or make a better one yourself.

I dare say at least once, if not many times in your life you have had a good rant or complained about a shoddy item or service you paid for. Please don't respond with some tripe about how CoD is different and the only salvation for us simmers.

Havent tried multiplayer in CloD yet, but for off-line campaigns, and putting together QMB action, Il-2 1946 is far better. Also the radio voices in CloD make those in Il-2 1946 seem believable in comparison.

"I'll fly your wing...............Lutonnn...........four"

"OK but STFU until I call YOU"

They have bitten off more than they could chew. Nothing more, nothing less.

If they succeed in financing further support for the game it will get fixed in a year or so. If not, it will die except for some hardcore-fans.

We saw this happen before (Janes-Series, MightyEighth, ...) and we will see this happen again. Maybe with CoD, maybe not.


That's a pretty unemotional view, maybe, but all this babbling around the facts won't help anybody.

Guess u weren't here when IL2 started

Latest tidbit:

Mini-update from devs

On Russian forum from developers (not official statement):

Quote:
В игре многое что отключено на данный момент, не соврать 50% кода в графике на данный момент отключено, со временем будем потихоньку включать.
Облака новые с сабскаттерингом, и погода, и до ландшафта дойдут руки.


Translation: at this point about 50% of features is off (just not ready), but devs will slowly add this features in game when it is ready. In future: new clouds with sub-scattering, new weather, landscape.
Also they say that current water is place-holder from DX9 version. New water will have a wave, surf, and will be transparent - you can see ships below waterline, submarine, bottom of the sea.

But right now they fixing bugs and work on optimisation.

Ah, another year then.

:confused:

When it works its great but thats not often enough and its too flawed to be described as the best.....or even particularily good. That crown is worn by Rise of Flight at the moment (IMHO anyway...)

There is much potential and i truly hope it lives up to it but its a bit early to declare a game the best when you can't even go online without crashing every 5 minutes.

Bugs, bugs and bugs!
It will be good with time. Now it's just enough to take a plane for a ride.

Some one should SUE these guys for putting that gun to your head to buy this game I mean of all the low down dirty tricks that someone could p......................... oh wait they didnt do that? Ah well then just STFU and sit down.


All your DAMN complaining is really Fricken annoying.

Were we told that we buy a game in pre-beta status?
How could we know that officially announced features are not on the game?

You would even buy a piece of crap and tell others to shut up.

LOL then get the f/$ER%?&* of this board.

And if they did not release it when they did you would have been craying WHENNNNNN!!!!!!

Yea but at least if they didn't release it, they wouldn't have dragged their name in the dirt. I am not sure what the reasoning was, but they did it. And yes while complaining really doesn't matter we might as well just "STFU", and leave for the summer and hopefully by fall come back to something better, this is a community.

Everyone is here complaining because they care, because they want to love the game, I guarantee everyone in here complaining is an avid flight sim fan, and wants this game to be the best thing for the next 8 years.

So unless the boards are taking away from the 1C company or causing some server to meltdown, you need the complainers, because from my stance the "complainers" are about 50% of the sales, and I don't see any new simmers jumping ship anytime soon.

I got my first online kill last night. It was the single imost immersive gaming experience i have ever had, bar none.

Not only was I struggling to come up to speed if engine temperature effects and the additional work load just in flying the plane that that entails, but trying to identify the tagets against ground clutter and then get into a firing solution without loosing track of the target. (Who helped me in the last moments by flying past my sights! I think he was concentrating on something else)

CoD has it's problems, but no more that DCS:A-10 and ROF when they were initialy let loose on the world.


Cheers

yet it's still too rough, but it will we the best by far, people just can't wait

Yeah I have to agree with a lot of the comments.

It's really a Beta so suck it up and wait for new patches. I certainly hope they get enough to make it viable or we are looking at a dead product. You can't sell this to new folks and expect them to stick with it.

It reminds me of DCS A10. Bought the prebeta with all the bugs and performance issues knowing it would become something really good. So far so good.

I really do hope this works out.

Well said, as long as it gets ironed out, which it sounds like maybe in a month or so... We will all forget about the first month or so of this paid Beta release...

Jawohl mein Führer!

The publishers and developers arn't stupid people and would not have released COD in the state it was in unless it was abolutely necessary. They new full well the respose would initially be bad. Now hopefully enough funds have been raised to secure further work on the series. This is actually a good thing for us, we may initially get a faulty product, but we now could have a product that will be continually added too and improved upon, instead of a development company that shuts down before the game is released.

Complainers that do so in a constructive manor are a great asset to the community, but there are more than a few that drive away new customers of the genre, which we all could ill afford. The only positive thing they do is provide entertainment, and keep the forums lively, while we still have a genre to participate in.

LOL all will be forgotten in "2 weeks"

Amen brother!!!

As Chivas said constructive critisim is a great thing, just pilling in the negative comments helps nothing. We all know that Oleg as a veru good reputation. He will deliver. They propbably just needed the cash to do so.

I really hope that the new addons (maps/plane/ships/ground object pack) are made available for a price, not givenaway for free. IMHO it is a small price to pay to assure the continuity of this genre. I know I would pay $30-$50 US for an expension pack.

This way maybe we will have drivable tanks, ships, subs, etc... This would be the BOMB ;)

Let they finish the core game first before your drop your pants and offer your money.

Your GPU sucks, but you also have no idea what you are talking about. Others with better systems are having serious problems that should not be there in the first place. Now they will likely improve many of these things over time, but it is currently NOT due to hardware, but to lack of optimization/planning.

I have no issue with the developers over the current performance. I appreciate that optimization is underway and it does not effect my opinion of the title, despite having a lower end machine.

What I do find clouds my opinion if the "sim" is the lack of content to enable anything more than a shallow BoB-lite skirmish generator.

No warships, one merchant and a handful of lifeboats means the Channel Offensive phase is beyond reach. Pacific Fighters looks flush with ships by comparison.

One RAF voice actor for the entire group of nations involved. Sounds like he's drawing words out of a hat too.

No radar. Some arcade approximation will give you a stilted position of a nearby enemy, but for a meaningful intercept vector, height or number of contacts... Forget it.

Crew members are just decoration.

Viable Bomber numbers are barely up to a diversionary raid, let alone anything approaching the Battle of Britain in any real sense.

Never mind current performance. It's the crushing lack of HISTORICAL content, not Technical content that has already made me loose interest.

I agree 100% with Chivas' comments. I think that this sim has ENORMOUS potential and, for all of our sakes, it must be supported and the developers/publishers must be ENCOURAGED to keep improving/refining it!

AGAIN.. (how many times I have to explain this to some tarts??) NO ONE forced you to buy when it released. I didnt, I read reviews, watched videos, read the forums. Then I decided (knowing how IL2 had developed in the past) that this would be a good time to buy and enjoy the game. NOT ONE PERSON FORCED YOU TO BUY THIS GAME AT RELEASE!!!!!!!!

get over yourself.

Salute

From all the whining going on here, you'd think they'd lost their homes and been bankrupted, instead of spending $45 on an incomplete product. :D

The whiners here should relax. This game is full of problems, it does need a lot of work, but anyone who does not see the potential is a fool.

I have a I7 2600k, running at 4.3ghz and a GTX-570 and the game runs flawlessly for me in all conditions. Others who don't have as good a system are having problems, but the game is being optimized continually.

When you have a good system like mine, the game is truly spectacular.

More of a concern to me are the following issues:

1) Flight model lacks tailplane effects on takeoff; while stall turns, humpties and tailslides can definitely be done, they're nowhere near as 'crisp' as they ought to be. The spin entries are every bit as odd as they were in IL2. (that is from a real pilot's evaluation)

2) Performance and equipment of the 109's, Spitfires and Hurricanes are not modelled at all correctly, in particular speeds and climbs are low, some aircraft have either the wrong props or poor fuel mixture modelling, and the aircraft universally suffer from a lack of performance over 10,000 ft, and backfiring due to lack of modelling of the altitude compensation in the carburetion or fuel injection systems.

3) Not enough ships to model the 'Convoy' phase of the battle, which is really the only stage which can be flown now with large numbers of aircraft.

4) Game really does need reflections modelled. We saw reflections in a series of promo videos, but I have a feeling they were eliminated in this foolish waste of effort on the epilepsy issue. Reflections were a key factor in WWII combat, the glint of sun off a canopy or shiny piece of metal were often the means by which enemy aircraft were spotted. Rise of Flight does this quite well and CoD needs to re-introduce this.

Even with all these problems, the game clearly has a depth which is not matched by any others out there. I fly RISE OF FLIGHT, and while that game currently has a flight model closer to the real thing, its damage model, and graphics do not come near the immersiveness of CoD. RoF also does not have anywhere near as complete an aircraft set as CoD, RoF went for the money and produced nearly all the Scouts to sell to those who want quick gratification, but the game completely lacks the two seaters which were present in large numbers and which are an absolute necessity for a decent online war. Realistic campaigns are impossible in RoF either online or offline. That is not the case in CoD, with the planeset available right now I could design a Night 'Barge Bombing' campaign for the RAF, a 1941 daylight, 'Rodeo' campaign for the RAF, a late '40 'Jabo' campaign for the Germans, a 'Night Blitz' 1940-41 campaign for the Luftwaffe, or any number of others. (except the convoys :( WE NEED AN RN DESTROYER!!!)

In any case, the original poster of this thread is partially right. CoD will be the best, even if it isn't now.

mate - the problem isn't your system, it's the game code. i have a very new high end system and it still runs terribly. I can run Arma 2 and Rise of Flight maxed out no probs, but this thing runs horribly.

I think and hope they will work it out eventually by re-writing massive slabs of code, but people should be made aware that simply spending their hard earned money to upgrade hardware will not make much difference to get this running properly.

wait for new patches before spending more money on hardware.

everybody see the potential of this game, that's why there is so much people knocking at the door
btw every passing day without a working MP is hurting the community badly ^^

Can you fly with 50-100 aircraft over london with mid range graphics settings and no stuttering/fps over 25? If not then you are not telling the truth.

Haven't tried that yet, only have tried the plain jane missions, but the plain jane missions over London have been without any issues, at my top settings, even when I increased the number of aircraft. My GTX-570 is overclocked. (I plan on adding a second GTX-570 when SLI is enabled)

If you are having a problem with your setup, you are doing something wrong. (unless you haven't overclocked that 980x, which can easily go 4.5 ghz without liquid cooling by the way)

In any case, performance anxiety aside, I didn't expect to see full scale 200 plane battles over London in the initial release. We didn't see that kind of thing with the original IL-2, even at the late stages of IL-2 1946 you couldn't fight a 'Battle of Berlin' with two hundred plane raids, and this game is far more complex and demanding. I am encouraged that multicore support can be implimented, it would suggest to me that there is a lot of headroom to improve the capabilities of this engine, and I believe we will be fighting large battles over London in a year or two.

I am hoping this game is in for the long haul, like IL-2, if you guys would be realistic and stop with the continually whining and complaining and think a bit into the future, you might realize there is a LOT of potential available, and we have a lot of good things to look forward too.

Unless the whiners drown out the good responses and the games sales suffer and it ends up being cancelled as far as any further development is concerned...

Now, THAT would be something worth crying about.

What's we're seeing now is a bunch of 40 year old drama queens blowing off steam from their dayjobs.

I dont have the game yet, but I havent seen any videos of people flying over london with good settings and no lag, let alone planes in combat. You have fraps?

"Everything seems new and not good enough to those too young to remember the old and too ignorant of Il2 history to have faith about it." – Not Thomas Sowell

I dont think hes minority. Cod Had and still has problems. But its also absolutely great. I can just repeat. Its not the first and will not be the last game that got released with loads of issues and still is a great game. Just like i.e. ROF. Was also bugged to hell and back at release. Look at it now. And for that matter i must really say that COD is improving MUCH faster than ROF did after its relase.

Winger

He definitively isn't the minority!
He belongs imho to the quiet majority of more "mature" forum members who have the patience and know from past experience what to expect from OM.
This sim isn't ready, yet.
But it will be -> the future is bright.
Even with all the bugs, for me this sim has degraded IL2-1946 to arcade, it is just no fun anymore.
I've tried RoF and have almost all planes, really no fun for me! Only furballs online -> not my kind of flying.
And jets, i can really do without them, the last interesting scenario was vietnam and there is no actual sim for those planes.

london bomber intercept mission. all settings high, except buildings which are set to very high and unlimited. everything on except ssao. gpu set to quality.

heres my fraps score.

Frames, Time , Min, Max, Avg
20164, 431998, 25, 92, 46.676

like buzzsaw im running a i5 2500k with a gtx 570 OC. the i5 is OC to 4.5ghz.

+1!

The game was published too early, but the alternative was it will never be published, i think. So we have a game with the potential to become the greatest flightsim in history.

You know Helicon, I am not interested in wasting my time posting a track and/or screenshots, I'm too busy building missions and having fun. (currently building a series of missions for a RAF Squadron based in the Portsmouth area as it defends the docks etc.) Choose to believe what I am saying or not, either way it doesn't concern me. It seems to me you and your ilk are more concerned with NOT having fun, and I refuse to indulge you and ruin my own good time.

get a clue
 

Except Oleg has nothing to do with this anymore, and what's more, people so conveniently forget, when IL2 was first released it was the only title in their stable, it was their only bread and butter, so they continued to work and polish with Oleg driving for perfection.

That is no longer the case, they have grown, and have many projects now, all deserving attention, and the original driving force has left the building along with Elvis. There are no guarantees whatsoever this title will get the same level or longevity of attention as IL2 , indeed there are many factors against that happening now.

People keep talking, banging on and on, saying it will be great in a year, or two; but in truth, they do not have a damn clue what level of support this title is likely to get. Moreover, the incessant droning about its rosy future, is just as annoying as those complaining, because the product as it stands TODAY is a broken mess, and Luthier and co have our money in their pockets now, today, not two years from now.

Everyone posting about how grand it will all be when fixed and branding everyone who disagrees is a "hater" or "troll" and claiming they should not post, should take a long hard look in that mirror. You are expressing an opinion, but would deny others the right to express theirs, simply because they disagree with you; and that my friends, makes you one and all, a bunch of hypocrites'; a beast, far worse than those who quite rightly complain about something they have paid for not working as advertised.

duuud :-) I have i7920@3.5 GHZ, GTX470 Twin frozr2 OC to 750Mhz on the core, 6GB DDR3 RAM (running at 1333Mhz), win7 64 bit and I still have probs. Yeah I have nice FPS but the game is not smooth at all, spec. above the land. So what are you talking about. This sim is still not optimised well.....we hope it will be....

I second that, but only because I am looking for a disctraction from work... ;)

I refrained from buying CoD until last Sunday, because I did not want to support UBI, which I thoutht to be the driving factor for the situation we are in. Finally I bought it via Steam, because I want to support simulation software developent generally. I also installed it, set all setting on max and tested a littel. London was flyable with around 25 FPS in low altitudes. LeHavre wasn´t, down to 12 FPS. Over sea I got 160+FPS (i know meaningless). Above 2000m the landscape looks messed up on highest settings, no joy. I don´t mention the stutters I had even with 80FPS indicated by FRAPS. What surprised me, was that my CPU workload never was higher than 25%, well, RAM was not visable touched (I7 2600 at stock 3,4GHz/1333MHz 8GB RAM/ ATI 6950-2GB). I don´t mind that, I was expecting this, so what? But I will not waste my time with CTDs, tinkering my system, just to get frustrated by random bugs of an faulty products. That`s the job of testers.

So, I would have even give the team 100 Euro or more, if they would have frankly said something like: " Hey folks. We faced some problems, we didn´t expect, we made mistakes in management and some wrong decisions, but we learnt a lot and at the end of the day, we didn´t meet our objective and the market is unforgiving. We would like to finish the programm, but we ran out of money. We give you access to the alpha-Version for a donation of 100€..."

But the way they choose to go, is unprofessional IMHO and not really satisfying. I have doubts, as the ones raised by Blue Scorpion.

I donated, bought a lizence for the product and hope they will continue support and overcome their problems in their management, in their software and their product. But I am not that naive to suppose that their success is granted. I will check again in 6 months or a year.

But now back to RoF... ;)

COD is far away from the best game. It is not even in half road.

I dont like land graphic at all, dont like ghost trees and ghost antena radars, dont like the way planes are flying (not immersion), dont like flight model and performacne of planes faults, dont like FF dont work, dont like V sync dont work, dont like that i dont have smooth ZOOM like in other games ( it is XXI centaury you know), dont like buggy DM and FM influence, dont like sounds, dont like optimalization of these game.

Only thing is nice are cocpits with shadows but it cut a lot fps now and some engine managment feature ( but still it is far from realistic and has many faults).

Maby but many in a year or so these game will be better and would have chance. But now i bought it and really i dont feel i want to play it in such state. Im playing IL2 Sturmovik from beggining, playing LOMAC ( Flanker 2.5 - Lock ON - FC2), playing ROF from beggining but i cant really play COD now :(

V synch works for me.

Have you tried disabling the AERO function via rightklick on the desktop? I did that yesterday and it worked wonders. It didnt increase FPS but made the gameplay MCUH mor smooth. Literally no stutters anymore. Not even over a big city - treetop.

Winger


My System:
Core i7 920 @4 GHz
GTX480 SLI (SLI currently disabled)
6GB GSKILL Ripjaws

OP +100. The silent majority, those of us who saw Forgotten Battles blossom into 1946 have the maturity and insight to understand greatness doesn't happen overnight it takes time and perseverance. Luthier will deliver and I don't have any doubt, this isn't just one game it's the new engine that'll support 10-15 years of simming, they're not gonna walk away.

I see that there's many from the Instant Gratification-crowd that I'm used to dealing with in MMO's here. True, CoD wasn't released in a stellar shape. I'll ive you that. I'll also give you the point on the sim being unplayable for many, and that there's still bugs, issues and the like.

Get over it. You've bought the game that you've waited 8+ years on. You can wait a few weeks/months more for the issues to be solved. So you spent $50 (or €50 in my case) on a product that turned out less than stellar, but one that has a bright future ahead of it. Surely you can see this? Or are you too blind?

1C deserves praise for actually being on the ball when it comes to patches etc. Don't know about you, but for me there's been leaps and bounds in both playability and performance over the last few weeks, and that's more than enough to offset any ire I might have had due to the state of the game at launch. Then again, it might be extensive playing of MMO's that have taught me to have patience when it comes to any piece of software out there, regardless of type.

If I was sitting on the UBI or 1C board, I would put up a server for people like you to upload missions, campaigns, skins, settings etc, similar to Mission4today and other sites. One of th etings thal really made IL2 enjoyable was all the great usermade material. One of the ways of making up for the lack of it in the release wersion of CoD would have been to offer a "one stop" site for content.

winger thanks for the tip mate...I already did that...

Oleg have NOT washed his hands and left the building, i couldn't even if he wanted to.

And thats more or less quoted from Luthier.


Besides, everyone assumes Oleg is the only one who knows what he is doing, he havent done all this by him self u know.

Oleg is gone........ so?

There is no reason you should be constantly banging your head against the wall screaming that this won`t be as good as the IL2 Sturmovik. Luthier has been behind things AFAIK since Aces Expansion Pack so he qualifies as "the driving force". If you negate the potential of this title being any good in the future, just leave. Simple. You aren`t changing anyone`s opinion anyway.

As of TODAY, I have spent a total of 40€ to play this game. That is all I payed for giving those folks some slack. Payed for their jobs and payed them to work in the future. Now those who have stayed with IL2 since 2001 have every right and proof to say that the game will be great, in some time. Meanwhile, those complaining are doing just that - complaining. You must be quite a sad person to get a spazmatic cry over 40€.

Constructive criticism is always welcome. Your post is just another example of a person who needs to get a life, because obviously he doesn`t have anything else to do in his sad existance other than to sit in front of a pc.
I understand your life is shaterred. :lol:

No offence, but refusing to tinker with your system, hardware and software wise and then blame CoD development team for boching the job is, well, misplaced to say the least.

For ex, Windows 7 Aero is a recourse hog in it self and its common sense to turn it of if u want the maximum out of your system when playing a extreemly demanding game,what ever game it may be.

Blaming the developer for NOT providing u with a "fix" for it is not, however, common sense.


Besides, when people with "uber" pc`s (everyone thinks they have one) have problems and the next guy, with a lesser system isnt having problems (besides the obvious buggs naturally), tell me, where does the problem lies, according to u (and others off course)

Clod was supposed to better than IL-2, a better game, an improvement.

IL-2's faults were:

Crappy, non immersive, non intuitive interface.
Interface so lacking in development one had to edit game files.
Game files so undocumented, even after ten years, that no one really knows how the .rcu files work (for example) with out a degree from the Unseen University in google operands.
Extremely limited game content (out of the box).
Extremely limited content generator.
Extremely arcane content generator
Crappy 1990's static campaign "generator", that missed over half the flyables.
Clunky in game AI command interface
Clunky AI
Vox so awfull every body used a third party program instead.
Multi play support so awfull every body used a third party program instead.
Clunky Track -ir support
Failure to update with the times (wide scren, font size etc.)
Failure to update difficulty settings (F3, 1980's icons etc.)

Now, every new software, even every new patch, introduces new problems which need addressing. That's understood. But how much of the above has Clod fixed?

There IS a very good sim under all this, I think we're all agreed.

But there's no interface, no documentation for the file hacking we're going to have to do to mack up for the appalling interface and most importantly of all, NO GAME!

We, the IL-2 fliers, can see the potential.

But we're losing flyers fast, new users just won't have a chance and I haven't dared recommend this game to any one I know yet. I've denied having it on two forums I frequent to avoid having to give an absolutely negative review.

They'd better buck up, and fast. Other wise it won't matter how much the fanbois wave their little flags, it'll all be game over.

So no, Avro. I can'tagree with you on this one. So far, this software is not fit for purpose.

Good for you that you enjoy this Software!

I personaly didnt bought it to make sightseeing fly arounds...
And even there would be no performance issues, and there are confirmed by the developers themselves, there is still a loooooong list of bugs and not correct working features.
Not to mention this "manual" , that leaves very important things in this game unmentioned!

And before the IL2 of 2001 is mentioned: 3
Weeks after release i alread had a lot of flown online missions (COOP, that is also not possible in CoD btw) in my flightbook. 3 weeks after CoD there is nothing.Just a flight and weapon testcenter that annoyes me always after a few minutes of use.
As yours , just a pesonal opinion of the current state of this software!

That is what we hope, but if you judge by the facts at hand, you have a product which does not meet the requirements and standards as advertised.

Even if the team works it`s butts off in 24/7 shifts (which I do not doubt), it is not granted that the problems will be solved. Time will show, until then it is understandable that some voice doubts and question the faith, which is widely defended by good will but not by facts. ;)

Thruth? I didnt, with my wildest expectations think that i could fly in CoD with all the settings on max more or less, 2 weeks after release.

Hell u couldnt even do that with IL2 1-2 years ago, or even today, depending on your system.

Anyone claiming to run IL2 100% maxed out on a Q6600 and gtx 260 is talking out of his hat. Over a major city, forget it.

Glas half empty vs glas half full ;)

/This.

U should check out SimHQ. A couple of people have tested 100+ up to 150+ aircrafts with good framerates.

Think it was either WernerVoss or Sascha.

Don´t know about ROF, but DCS A-10 was very functional in its final release form and comparing that to CoDs release is really an insult. Betas of A-10might have sucked like a vacuum, but at least people who paid for beta did know what they were getting themselfs into. Bottom line is; with A-10 final release felt actually like a game you can play, with CoD most of us were fooled into participating for paid beta.

I think this is a point worth of noting, cause both A10 and CoD are extremely accurate and demanding simulators aimed for specific and limited market.

There is also the right way to do these things, and by far the way Eagle Dynamics chose was better. Of course in the ideal world games and sims alike would get published as a totally finished products, with no need for patching whatsoever.

I never demanded a fix and didn´t blame anyone for bad performance. I know it would run sufficiently (regarding performance) on my system if I would tinker around. Sorry, if that was the sound. But I avoid this way, because I expect many things to be changed in all ways (FM/DM, CEM, graphic options, ME, menu handling etc) and I will not go through the frustration of my squadmates are going through (I hear on TS), trying to play (not to test) the game. I decided to wait and start, when it gets obvious that the issues were dealt with and settled, so I do not have to change my config every week. That is no problem for me, I can wait one more year after waiting so many.

Many other repeat and repeat, that finally this will be the best sim, that is their opinion and ok for them. But I just wanted to point out that, this is speculation, even if the team keeps on going like they are now, the list is long and the road looks steep. In the last weeks, the team looked like “trying to make a software, which is by is own developed for the state of art hardware, running on 3 years old hardware”. That is not always possible and gives them a hard time. Too many compromises and ears for the crowd are finally messing more up, then settling them. And I simply have no proof available, in which I would trust, that the problems will finally be overcome and wonder why so many praise and praise a product, which was sold as a finished product, and now find themselves in the role of Beta-Testers.

The only thing I would blame is the marketing strategy and the way of puplishing choosen by the team. ;)

I agree on several things.

For me personally, i hope we get a proper QMB that works like its suppose to and working multiplayer. To unstable as it is now.

Feels like join servers from within the game is whats causes the problems. Best thing would be HL. Always worked (well, 90% of the time at least.). But i guess HL is out of the question now with Steam lurking in the background no matter what.

This was a development management problem and it is now a marketing management problem.

If you put put a development team in a closed environment without regular product contact with real users for 6 years and constantly slippable deadlines you are asking for trouble.

They will fiddle with technicaly and philosphicaly intersesting stuff and will not even notice real world requirements.

Every Sim developper will as a professional always have the latest hot PC setup, so will not notice that performance is an issue. He will build a quirky user interface which he always tests in the same way and think it's obvious to anyone that it should work that way, users are so stupid. A complete manual, documentation and content are not interesting, after six years immersed in the product he thinks humans are born with a head full of such inate knowledge or can make it up themselves.

Note carefully, IL2 was not developed this way. If I remember right they bought out a limited prototype which was first released to the public as a demo way before the product. From that point it had constant user feedback which refined it and kept it on-track.

OK so the problem exists, you can't fix the past, what's happening now?

Well they could have put in a development manager to spend another 12 months trying to sort it out.... and probably money would run out...

The other choice is to stick it on the street, let user feedback focus the development team on real world issues and well it will sink or swim.

As far as I'm concerned it was a good decision. Another 12 months in the closed room with a manager weilding a baseball bat and it might have been all lost.

What you will now see is the development team reacting like a scalded cat and delivering patches

The current marketing problem is a bit more regretful. It would have been more honest if they had offered the chance for customers to buy a copy so they could participate in product testing. I think a lot of us would have bought in to that - I would have.

However, you don't get rich in marketing by scrupulous honesty, so I can understand the decision.

Now what are we going to do about it?

1/ Say there is no problem
2/ Have a good rant
3/ Throw the toys out of the pram
4/ Get testing and log nice clear bug reports
5/ Get back to real life and start complaining that I have to press shift F1 to see 109 gunsight and while I'm on the subject it dives slower than a spitfire and..
6/ Have a go at Stenka cos what he's said is immoral
7/ Open a beer and chill out

Now all together now, in chorus let's.....

Yes,its gonna be a great game....the best....when its "finished"...after some more patches.We've waited years to buy an unfinished game...but still its better than nothing.So,after some more patches,and FORCE FEEDBACK,we'll all stop complaining!!

What resolution and details you flying at? I have a system similar to your but I dont have clod yet (USA)

wake up princess, average salary in croatia is around 680 €, with growing unemployment rate (we are the worst in this part of teh world now), with loans for flats ("given" from greedy foreign banks), all the expenses, 1L of gasoline costs 1.4 euros, you are left with almost nothing....and I have to pay full price not like in russia for cheaper...
SO YEAH 40€ is a luxury here...yep, it is a big deal mate....
BUT, I never "whined" because of the money but because CLOD was ADVERTISED (movies etc) as comopleted products.....and what we got? Look at my post at "mini update from devs"
I will wait till USA release, by then we will know what we will have on long terms....if they fail I wouldnt cry, I would sell or trash the epic failure of the game and still will be able to enjoy in old IL2, you know new UP and HSFX modes are on the horizon....its a different game now...

I've been telling this to many people: I know a lot of people who were huge fans of IL2 and just can't follow in Clod.
Their systems, though they can play decently IL-2, they can't even load Clod and this is pitty, cause some of them were among the best guys of the community.

It's really sad that this game will leave a quite big part of the community behind, only because of its performance and the costs involved...

PS. I spent 1.060 euros for a brand new tower, only to hear from some people that my performance problems are because of my system!!!
OK, next time I'll robe a bank in order to play this game...

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol: :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

I upgraded my rig (thanks to my part-time job I did for foreign company) to pretty decent setup....i7920@3.5Ghz on stock volt, GTX470 Twin frozr2 OC to 750 on core, 6GB of RAM, win7 64 bit...although I have a decent FPS the sim isnt smooth at all...above the land its even worse...I did all the optimisations and tweaks i know (I have pretty good HW and SW knowledge, was beat tester etc etc), but still no fdrastic improvement...I didnt expect to run CLOD full max but i cant run it decentlz on ANY settings...

My rig is slower than yours and CloD runs smooth on higher than medium settings. So its not the problem of missing computing power but a problem of the code. There are bugs in CloD and everyone saying this is just because of dumb users or slow rigs is damn wrong. Maybe thats it in a few cases but to blame everyone with problems running CloD is a bad choice.
There is much work left to do before CloD is the simulation we all have waited for. But I'll wait till it gets there mostly because of the lack of alternatives.

what we had in ROF..simmilar problem, game wasnt optimised (but to be fair was optimised much better than CLOD, from the release) and because of the "not optimised code" ROF was runnig like shhhh on some systems while on some (even slower) was running good....
so ITS THE CODE..period

Didn't Oleg have to bail Luthier/Ilya when he was developing Pacific Fighters?

True, but saying ALL the problems is due to bad coding (like 99% of those saying that have any idea of what they speak of) is equally wrong.

Bugs and compatibility problems is one thing. "Bad" coding is something else.

i think you've just deserved a certified official fanboy with blinkers 2011 badge©

LOL, I owned a software development company... I'm not dropping anything just stating the obvious... nothing is free in this word ;)

........

And this is why it was not a worldwide release... One would assume that they are giving themselve time to fix a bunch of stuff before they enter their biggest market...

Its like I said... no $$$$, no candy. Without money, you can't pay your staff, without staff you can finish the game... ... ...

It is sad... but what... you want a game with 2011 bells and whistles that runs on 3-5 year old PCs? It would be nice if it was possible but it's not the way that current technology works... Maybe when "cloud" gaming is a reality, upgrading our machine will be a thing of the past, but for now... you got to pay to play.

You got me wrong, I think. I totally agree to what you say. There are obviously many things missing, some are just placeholders (which should have been said) and some are just wrong. Also there are many people with a system which is set up badly and there are those guys who think have a superior rig and complain that full setting is not working.
I understand those people complaining about things promised and now missing cos they have paid for. This had to be said (one time). Bashing the game and spaming in every thread is a whole different thing and annoyes other people using this forum and also the admins and developers reading this. So, complaining is okay if done in one of this existing threads in a adequate way.
The developers has proven that they are willing to improve the game and they dont ignore wishes from the community. Thats what makes me saying the money spent to the collectors edition has been worth it.

I'll have to disagree for the simple reason that what happens with Clod is not what's happening with pc games in general.
Most users who can't play Clod at all, actually can play any other 2011 game in lowest settings. Which leads us to the usual reply "Clod is like no other game, as it is far superior to all of them", which leads to usual reply "you must be joking, have you seen Crysis 2 or other major modern titles?", which leads to next reply "they have nice graphics but small maps", which leads to next reply "exactly! Clod devs should find what makes the game unplayable, be it huge map, or too many buildings, or windmills working with wind and offer some solution", which leads to next reply "...", LOOP.

In any case, I think that Stenka gave a nice reply that I'm very close wth it:

I know that eventually, be it one or two years from now, more people will be able to play the game, when hardware gets cheaper, but still I'm too sad cause I'll miss a lot of online friends because of what I understand was a bad developer's project schedule.
Even the most certified fanboys have to admit this, otherwise it's like there's no connection. Like we're screaming to each other with only our voices from different planets in different galaxies.

While reading through the posts, this guy really stood out...

Might as well say..

"don't like life"

its not the best, id say DCS-A10C is the best. the devs didnt finish this game.

My comment about Oleg was in response to a post, which I quoted directly, that Oleg was still behind this game, he is not; it was a simple statement of fact, so what is your point in bringing it up?

Now, show me your copy of the guarantee this will have support and be fixed in 2 years time, no? Did not think so, anything else is pure conjecture and blowing smoke out of your ass, I too want to see it fixed, but wanting and getting are entirely different. For what it's worth, I have been with the series since the very start and own every iteration and add-on, but that does not mean shit, and it most certainly does not grant special insight into this titles future, to assume it does is idiocy.

/quote " because obviously he doesn`t have anything else to do in his sad existence other than to sit in front of a pc". So just what were you doing while posting here, I seriously doubt you were using ESP to scour the internet; seems to me like a classic case of transference, you should deal with that, it is clearly something that bothers you.

Have a good day… Oh before I forget; its, "paid", "existence" and "shattered", may help to check before you post in future, lest you be taken for a moron.

OK... 1st CLOD is a flight sim, not a FPS... consequently you need one hell of a CPU to run something that tends toward replicating reality... CLOD is not even close to replicating the real thing, its uses tables... not even "blade theory"... But still, the faster your CPU the better (once the bugs are worked out). And eventually the CPU will be the bottleneck.

The rest is eye candy. Even if you have the faster GPU on the market, if your CPU is not up to part... then you get the shaft... So it becomes as balancing act...

Give it time... and this sim will blow you away.

If your are pissed at spending 50$ 6 month before it was "ready"... then take confort in the fact that at he current prevailing rate of interest (of savings accounts) it cost you about 25 cents (that's accoutning for time value of money for all the un$%?& t%?&* outhere)...

Fine with me, I just dont like people bullshitting and lying on the forums all the time. So if you are going to make a claim that no one else can and not support it, be my guest.

Gents,

As the OP, may I thank you all for your comments and I've read them all.

There is a suggestion from a poster, that I may not be getting the best out of my system. Many thanks, I'll follow this up.

There were of course one or two 'keyboard macho warriors' who took the opportunity to insult me. Only if you insult me to my face will I respect you.

This sim so far has provided more than enough to discover,learn and enjoy; even though I can't yet fly at treetop height.

The silent majority don't whine. They recognise potential,effort and determination when they see it.

Sorry for my whine :cool:


Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

Are you sure your settings are ok, Ive been playing MP for a week or two on and off, there have been some server issues, but I was on for a couple of hours yesterday.

+1 Sounds like a God damn nursery in here with all the whinning and crying bunch of spoiled little retards.

LMAO!!!! With all the bitching coming out of your pie hole and you don't even have the game yet. I beg you please do not purchase this title until it is running at top speed Your bitching about something you don't even own yet for Gods sake stop, just STOP!!!!!

Oleg is gone and has been for a while, which may be the whole problem.
Luthier messed up PF and CoD is strike 2.

You are not even smart enough to know how to overclock that overpriced 980x of yours or your GTX-580. No but you have plenty of time to whine about not getting good framerates.

Another poster with a slower CPU than mine has already given you his FRAPS figures, but no you are too big headed and egotistical to admit maybe you don't know what you're talking about.

Why don't you check the CPU comparisons big brain? Maybe you'd notice and overclocked 2600k kicks a stock 980x's butt.

What an amateur. :D

Edit:

Now he admits he doesn't even have the game@!!!!!

What an ego, telling us how it runs without even owning it.... amazing he must be telepathic. :D