Luthier Update Clarification Please
 

"We obviously remain hard at work on the series. We will continue to improve the game up until the eventual release of its sequel."

Above is an extract from your last update, as expected from such a sentence there is muttering in the ranks about what this actually means.

Could you give us an insight into the future of Cliffs of Dover and Battle for Moscow!

Will the sequel be a standalone, addon or will it be both?

Sequel means sequel, standalone game, if he is speaking in normal gaming terms that is.

I have a feeling that it will be both, just like Pacific fighters which could be used as standalone or as an expansion for IL2 owners.

Hopefully leave XP support and go for true DX11

Is there definetly going to be a theatre in Russia? I've also heard rumours about a Northern Africa setting?!

In some screenshots they showed us a la5 (or other russian plane) development

.....and a IL2 oneseater and a tower of the Kremlin.

All problems will be fixed when we buy the sequel...
Promise ;)

You Lies!!

No, you can trust me, its the internet.

Excellent question Krupi (which I have actually asked Ilya before and received no response). I'm rapidly losing faith in CoD ever representing a convincing or immersive representation of the BoB without extensive community intervention (IE Mission builders, modding etc).

It seems one of the most pivotal battles in History (fact) may just be a 1c 'test lab' now, reduced to the status of Guinea pig....which is a shame. Tossing this into the 'that'll do' bin would be a mistake on their part. Please prove me wrong. Surely all new developments/features in 'Battle for Moscow' will be applicable to CoD, too? Madness to think otherwise, but these days I sadly find myself second guessing everything they do. :o

In all seriousness, I think you just nailed it. :(

Well,
i'm no native english speaker but what i find disturbing is phrasing of ' ... eventual release of its sequel'.

To me this sounds different to what was said in the past:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=24692

Is this a first hint that the series may be cancelled?!?
I hope not ...

He he,you jester you :lol:.........actually,personally speaking I will support this game all the way,but if they don't fix the age old problems like the comms and AI etc,they won't be receiving anymore cash from me as regards sequels that follow this.

+1 to what uther said; you nailed it mate.
IMHO, the BoB side of this series will only truly come into its own once the community can work their magic. Dedicated groups working on areas such as the terrain, weather, effects etc could truly lift this game to new realms, as well as offering the users a lot of choice in how their game plays and looks.
Roll on the SDK('s)!

Let's just say I wont be standing outside the local games shop waiting for it to open the next time. I'll just let the rest of you do the guinea pig ride the next time around.

If we ever get to that....

I hope too, that the BoB 1940 szenario will be extended in its content and will not be dropped with the release of the successor BoM 1941. It would be a shame...

Moin Touchdown,

english meaning of eventual is not our meaning of eventuell... ;)

eventually = finally => schlußendlich

I think (and mostly HOPE) that the sequel of IL-2 Cliffs of Dover will be the same as IL-2 plus all expansions like Pacific Figthers etc.

It's the most logic thing.

Would be useless to have, let's say, 5 different IL-2 without being able to fly (for example) a FW190 on the Channel, creating new battle's scenarios etc.

Let's hope.

S!

Why is that such a big problem? As has been said many times - it was possibly a choice of releasing CloD as was or never seeing it let alone any sequel. No doubt the plan is to get CloD properly sorted as quickly as possible to the developers and players satisfaction and once the engine is fully working, as I am sure it will be then other theatres can be released as per the original IL-2 series. This makes perfect sense if you really want CloD to carry on in the MG tradition which in turn is dependent on financial success.

If you want to call the sim a test bed and players guinea pigs then fine. The Battle of Britain is a perfect scenario for this. It was relatively short, contained in a small area and had a limited plane set. Apart from us Brits who see it as a major conflict up there with Agincourt, Trafalgar and Waterloo, the rest of the world see it as a rather minor side show. Once it is fully working and has good reviews then the important theatres will be grabbed by serious and not so serious simmers everywhere.

And you people don't fool anyone with your righteous indignation and threats of never touching a Maddox offering again. Everyone on this forum is absolutely wetting themselves for Clod to come good and when it does they will empty thier piggy banks quicker than a stoat on steroids to have the Battle for Moscow or the Mediterranian or whatever will come next.

Wrong, that was me before the release of CloD, high expectations -rightly so- and big letdowns. I didn't say that I'd never buy a MG offering again, I simply meant that I will wait until the verdict is out this time around, if it's in shambles like CloD was at release then no, I will not "touch" it. I'm sure the Moscow sequel will be in a much better state though considering the improvements that has been made with CloD.

I will definitely buy a sequel/add on for this game. Even though CLoD is not finished, I see the potential this game has and for the games to come. MG's track record is rather good as far as my experience goes and I will keep that faith in them.

Just my opinion though but I do not think they will leave CLoD in the desk drawer without first completing it. That would be like drafting an architectural blue print, then erecting the building without it. It is the base design and it needs to be complete for future expansions.

Whiskey

Despite the negatives, they will buy it.. there is nothing else in the WWII stable that is waiting to take their fancy, they will be back.. lol!
Next theatre, North Africa/Med.. be sure! (had to say it)..

I doubt they will ever be able to represent an event such as Adler Tag or any other significantly sized battle with this sim. Certainly not until its into its old age at any rate. It will remain an aerial skirmisher. Best left to represent those slow days of the battle which had bad weather or the odd channel convoy (assuming we see some weather and ships one day). The cpu bottlenecking might not be such a problem for an eastern front scenario with only dozens, rather than hundereds of aircraft being needed to give a credible or historic number of aircraft in the air a one time.

Hi flyingblind. It's a 'problem' if you are sold a product purporting to be (amongst many other things) a simulation of said battle which is in reality nothing of the sort. It is in essence a (faulty) tech demo, and not unlike FSX with guns. Maybe a slight exaggeration for effect, but not too far from the truth. As a sim 'BoB experience' (which is what we were sold) it falls very short of the mark. If you are happy with that, then I'm happy for you.

On the 'importance' or otherwise of the BoB, that's a matter for another thread and debate, and has been done to death already. Nationalism does not enter the equation.

'Once it is fully working'

I'm a day dream believer too. Won't be holding my breath anymore though; asphyxiation can never be good. Just ask Michael Hutchence. With a Ouija board, perhaps. :grin:

I can agree on some points, namely that we all want CoD to come good......we have that in common. The BoB is not my 'favourite' conflict or theatre, that would be North Africa and the Med.

I have no desire to argue with you FB, and I won't. That is my opinion. You have yours. All well and good. ;)

Cheers.

I get the feeling that you have grossly under estimated the engine I have seen bids of CID with loads if aircraft flying at the same time.

I know the footage you mean. There's that handy app that lets you record at very slow speed and reassemble at normal speed later on. It's good for movie making as it avoids the lag and stutters you'd get if you tried to play the mission out in real time.

Those vids are indeed recorded at 1/2 the speed.. Isnt it Sony Vegas?

all that bitching and moaning over what is and what was.. lol now i understand why Oleg choose another career path :(

You realy should take the time and read back all what is said not only in this thread but in all the other ones aswell. Then you see how pathetic this all is!!

As far as i see it... no this game isn't finished ad yes they work hard to correct that. Yes the game was released to early but i don't think the devs are to blame for that but i suspect it was an UBISOFT decision to get there investments back (that's all that counts for those guys).

So lets not post negative threads any longer and help the devs instead to make things Sim the winner that it realy is. We can all help with that.

So who cares what went wrong, lets see how to make it better now.

S!

There's one built into the recorder of CoD too. Quite handy it is. ;)

I think it's good that they are also working on a sequel, if it is like the previous sequels/stand-alones the old maps and airplanes will be available as well in the new product and so the BoB will continue to improve graphically, FM and AI wise ect.

And we will all get a copy for free after all this years of patience, endless nights of testing, personal disappointment and expenses for additional hardware ? ;)

your reward will be working AA in the sequel...aaand all the eye candy working on non nuclear rigs!

seriously its hilarious they are talking about a sequel with a current sim in its early beta state....but on positive note we just finished with alpha testing.....

I'm buying any sequel because i'm way to much in love with WWII planes. I just can't leave them be :P
And there's still some left overs in my bucket of faith ;)

+1

I don't care about having to work as Beta tester, really, but think about the guys who preordered Clod at full price... what had they compared to the guys who bought it yesterday at half the price?

Six months of "alpha"?

Hear Hear..free upgrades for the likes of me who pre-ordered the collectors edition!

I wouldn't bet on it...... :)

I second this fellows motion! Only right and proper though, innit blud? :grin:

Like others have said I'm sure it will be like Pacific Fighters. You can play it standalone or merge it with your CloD install.

I'm sure they will also release a "gold pack" as well containing both so people late to the party can get everything they need all at once. That's how I originally bought IL2 :)
I think I bought a gold pack of Forgotten Battles combined with the ACES expansion pack.

You have to assume the new game will be more polished, hopefully they have learned their lesson.

I think it is plain dumb to expect/demand any freebees!

We all had our time wasted with this program, a part had fun complaining, a other part had fun playing and exploring and the majority had fun reading the forii.

So, everybody got something for his/her money, no reason to complain.

And in Software it is always expensive to be the early bird.

lol

+ 1

That's the way they have worked before and no signs of any change in that.

The problem is that if even the die hard fans that populate this forum (?) threaten to not buy a sequel if feature x is not there I loose all hope. This is the only WW2 sim available from this decade and the only alternative would be a RoF WW2 release? But I can just imagine a furball with 500+ aircraft over London in RoF. Talk about squermish engine over the flat and empty fields of Flanders with some small towns...

Mazex

+ 1

But listening to some of the people here you could think they has bought some IBM server software like Websphere for a couple of billion $

Mazex

A couple of billion for WebSphere....yep, that'll be about right....and it's still a bloody nightmare!

Sorry, off topic.

Ahhh, thx, better use an online dic next time before posting :)

Agreed 100%

Flight simming is an expensive hobby! Always has been and most likely always will be! Just to play these $50 dollar games you have to spend at least $1k on a decent PC and joystick.

With that in mind

May I make a suggestion to those that constantly bring up the $50 dollar cost of the game?

If your financial 'worth' (read your starbuck's job or allowance from your parents) is such that your 'life' will be impacted by the outcome of a $50 dollar game, than I highly recommend that you give up flight simming or any other aspect of PC gaming and play something you can afford, like checkers! Which in turn would mean you would not have to make those hard decisions in life like 'flight sim' vs. 'shoes for the kids' or 'flight sim' vs. 'eating tonight'. Just a thought!

+1

Battle for Moscow. Look at display from 1S-Softklab ;)

http://fooblog.mexxoft.com/wp-conten.../11/Igomir.jpg

That IL-10 might be a hint towards the Korean expansion? Sure doesn't belong in the winter of '41-'42 ;)

Great find....thank you Foo'bar !

After the CloD release I for one will be very cautious when it comes to buying another 1C/Luthier product.

I already got burned with Pacific Fighters and I only bought the 1946 addon out of a sense of loyalty. My goodwill towards the creators of IL2, Forgotten Battles and the Aces Expansion pack has been pretty much exhausted by now.

There is one thing missing from that poster that I also wish was missing from the my limited edition box.

And before some smart ass says the reason it isn't shown, I know 1C was behind the Russian version.

+1

Absolutely.

Sequel ! you are having a laugh. Not until a PC within the advertised specs can run this game adequately and reliably.

Yes, i concur!

1c should really change the specs!!!!

Say i.e. a quad-core with 3 Ghz, a GT560 or HD6850 with min. 1GB and 8GB Ram coupled with win7/64 as minimum requirement.

Makes developing easier and more futureproof, i believe.

I don't know if that would do it?

Take cigarettes labels for example..

For the past 30+ years they have been putting labels on the package that said smoking is bad for your health.. Yet there are still 'some' that claim they 'didn't know' it was bad for them and are trying to sue cigarette companies

This same mentality applies to people who look at the specs on the box and note that their 3 year old PC 'meets' the specs..

They run home..

Install the game..

And even before they try and fly once!

They go to the options menu and crank all the settings up to max or high..

Than sit back and wonder why the game runs like a slide show..

Worse they they come here and play the victim and act as if they were some how cheated or fooled into buying the game

Never stopping to consider that maybe.. just maybe the 'min requirements' on the box means they will have to use 'min settings' in the game

If it wasn't so sad it would be funny as hell!

Abso - freakin - lutely.

Gut gesagt, ParaB.

HAHAHAHAHHA

Lol, you want to look at the minimum and recommended hardware on the back of the box that i have in front of me, then go speak to then peeps that have that exact system and explain to them why they couldnt run it on ANY settings..

Come on mate, play the game... pardon the pun

yawn

anysetting.. sure.. sure.. sure

Oh Dear..

Deluded

I will make it easier for you to digest, 'recommended' means slide show then does it? and the games settings need to be on the very minimum to run at even 10+FPS... thats normal then for you is it?

Thats what normally happens?

Please

Il EDIT this just so we understand each other and everyone can laugh at you..

Without bringing up stuff that has been flogged to death...what your saying is that a lot of people had problems because of their system specs and that they should of known that Minimum means 'complete rubbish' and Recommended in the world of gaming actually means 'yes you can play it but it will look like crap, worse than IL2 infact and that dont expect to put anything over MED settings' and that Developers actually only want the buying public to play their games on LOw-MED settings instead of actually seeing the game in akk its glory and appreciating the GFX engine and the GFX design that has cost fk*n sh*t loads!

LMAO

And please change your Sig, cuz thats horse shyte too... as proven

Ah I see we have a IL-2 cherry in our midst

First allow me to thank you for providing a lead into my next example

As noted

At one end of the scale we have these goofballs that think their 3 year old min requirement PCs should run the game smoothly with the settings set to HIGH

At the other end of the scale we have similar numbskulls that think their brand new PC should run the game smoothly with the settings set to HIGH

I say numbskulls because they are clearly ignorant of the FACT that when a company goes to the trouble of making a new graphics engine they don't target the current crop of video hardware.. They target the future video hardware. So their new graphics engine will NOT be absolute within six months.

Now a little IL-2 history lesson. If you were lucky enough to play IL-2 some 10 years ago you would recall that at the time that graphics engine took a lot of video horse power to run it, why? Because Oleg and the crew created a graphics engine for the future, not the present. Which is why IL2 still looks good today, but, at the same time runs just fine on very low end older video cards.

Now that your up to speed on 1C history, hopefully you will realize that when a new graphics engine comes out, it is expected to tax the best of the best most expensive top-o-d-line video cards currently one the market such that even they will have to turn down some of the options. The idea being that in a year or two, even the baseline and low end cards will have no trouble running the game at full options. Which is exacatlly how 1C did it with IL-2.

Hope that helps! S!

Your mistake was having "high expectations", to begin with...and I don't mean that in a negative sense. I'm a BIG fan of the "IL2 Sturmovik" series, but I don't fantasize, dream and place high expectations on the final product. What these guys have done is really quite interesting...its not perfect (by any measure of the word), but what they have accomplished (post patches, ect) is looking quite good.

I'm just curious...what aspect of the game fails to "immerse" you in the Battle Of Britain? I'm assuming that you are not talking about the "clouds", or "AI" because these are aspects of the game that will always be improved and updated (just like they always did). I don't know if people remember the original "IL2" series, but it was always a work in progress...right up to the very end. Nothing new...

GAME RELEASE/MARKETING
There's a lot of posts suggesting we should not complain about ClOD because of it's innovative engine & other advances etc. The fact is that 1C chose to market the game under the brand "IL2-Sturmkovic" along with all the other hype about immersive experience, 100's of on-line players etc. As such, it is not unreasonable for the public to expect that the game woud be at least on a par with IL2-1946 upon release. Sadly the reality is that the game has more bugs than Lindsay Lohan's crotch, even 7 months after release. I, for one, am extremely disappointed with the game. It does not live up to my expectations.

MISSION BUILDING
I am an experienced mission builder for Il2-1946. I'd like to build more ClOD missions, but a lack of FMB information, only moderate C# experience, combined with a slew of new property options & objects that no-one has a clue how they work is frustrating to say the least. It is difficult to know whether a FMB feature does not work because it's bugged or because it's not yet enabled/completed, or because I (as a mision builder) I have not used it correctly.

SEQUEL
I recall written information from the developers some time ago that the next theare of op's would be the Mediteranean. Now posts here are talking about the Battle of Moscow. What's going on?

As others I felt disappointed by a number of problems and limitations of IL2 COD, but then again things are slowly improving (I also think they're improving too slowly), and IL2 COD sets the bar higher than anything available for the WW2.

It's very similar to the story of FSX. During years (not months), there was a vast crowd stating that FSX would die quickly, leaving a gap with nothing or just leading many people to skip to the next iteration (or competitor). But now, look at FTX addons, A2A or PMDG addon planes etc, and look at how people with current gen machines run this at max settings, and you'll probably have a preview of how things will sort themselves out for IL2 COD. A sequel will also help to fix some problems by the developpers themselves (while FSX never had that chance), and hopefully it will follow the tradition of IL2 and allow itself to be combined with IL2 COD. It's not that bad a prospect.

I seriously doubt any big competitor will suddenly pop out of nowhere (I think Gaijin are bound to remain on the more gamey side of things to make their mmo thing compatible with a sufficiently large player base, I don't expect a high details sim there), so whatever ride this might be, I expect that many WW2 fligt sim fans will remain on board anyway (that's what I'll do, even if it's a bitter ride it's still better than nothing, I wish we had that option for a space combat game in the xwing tradition for example, I would take it even with bugs rather than just endure years looking at a dead genre).

no official answer?

Of course not! Luthier will be back in a few weeks or months for 30 seconds to post another beta.
Until then we make the best of what we have. Or not.
Choice is a wonderful thing! ;)

lol, this made me laugh "your mistake"

The high expectations came from all the BS that Oleg and Luthier were constantly spouting pre-release, only a few of us saw through it, you unfortunately were one of those that didn't.

Spot on. Next time around I'll sit back for an additional year while 1C complete the game.
Looking at CloD cycle it will take 1C 10 months (>50% said increase in fps) to make the game playable on minimum reqs.
An increase of fps by >50% is to me an indication that they didn't do stuff properly to begin with.

Some of us were far too trusting, and why shouldn't we have been? it was after all Oleg and he did deliver on IL2. Sadly, that trust is now damaged badly and it'll take a great deal of work before I'll believe anything that I don't actually have access to myself from now on.

Somedays I wish I was as mistrusting as Tree clearly was, but that's just not in my nature.

Given the way sequels worked with the IL2 series I'd trust them to deliver something that can be integrated with what we have, given the way we were and continue to be treated I'm not holding my breath for that to happen...

Really they didn't do stuff propperly at the beginning... What makes you say that!!!!??

Yes I am being sarcastic.

what bothers me is why Oleg vanished after release...he was here frequently few weeks before release...at least he could say GOODBYE.....we had a good cooperation in old IL2...the man just gone...
pffffft

One thing's for sure, I'll buy the bio of Oleg if he writes one.
What did really happened behind the scenes?

It couldn't have been good.. Why would you leave the 'premier WWII aviation sim' on the eve of it's crowning glory?

maybe just because he knew the glory will not be...

He was only here to pocket some cash, its obvious a deal was done, he even had the nerve/cheek to show up at the launch party to watch the pile of crap (on release) be sold to his unsuspecting fans. Now that takes some balls.

Never the less we love him. :grin:

Please. Tree pre-ordered the game. And he'll probably pre-order the sequel.

Oh you can bet he will!

On that note.. Is it just me.. Or does there seem to be more to it than some of these whinners are letting on? I mean really.. All this over $50 for a game? Most of these guys sound like they spend $1,000+ on a prom dress and Oleg never showed up to take them to the prom. :rolleyes:

And that makes exactly what difference to my comment? Oh, that's right. None.

Seriously? He paid for a game that was not yet released. That means he trusted them.

No, it means he was willing to waste £30 on a game instead of a round of drinks.

Wow, I didn't think there was anyone in here who has less respect for Tree than I do. You win!

What? I have no respect for him because he was willing to throw £30 down the drain on the off chance? Not sure where you're getting all this information from but I can tell you it's faulty and needs patching :P

So, you have a lot of respect for people who knowingly piss their money away? I'm confused. You're upset that the game is not worth the money you spent on it, but you have no problem with someone else knowingly pissing their money away on that very same game. That is very odd.

+1

Despite its many faults, CoD has been the best 50 bucks I've spent in a long time. Have enjoyed many hours flying the ATAG server with you guys, and using Teamspeak to greatly enhance the experience (including joking how similar Snapper, Sniper, Striker, etc. sound in the heat of a dogfight).

When I think of the money I've blown on bad hardware AND software over the years.........50 lousy bucks is NUTHIN'!!!!!!! :rolleyes:

You should stop attempting to read between lines that dont exist, it's clearly confusing you...

I'm not the one who is confused. Tree pre-ordered the game. That means he trusted that he would get value for his money. Period.

Hmmm, I agree with you on the $50 issue, however there was a huge amount of speculation on the game, underpinned by gloriously extravagent (and largely wrong) statements from Oleg on what the game would be like on release. I believe the community is largely self-destructive in its ability to get worked up over minor issues (as you suggest towards), however Oleg's statements can't be ignored. IMHO, many of us were duped into believing the game would be something it wasn't on release. The most tangible example were the release videos: filmed at 1/8 speed and aimed at showing a 'playable game'. Yes, it showed the game was playable, but we weren't aware the game was running at 1/8 speed for it to be playable at that stage. This is the most palpable, and upsetting, part of the process. The fact that the release was a mess, and the situation was sugar-coated and offered with a virtual cherry on top. We weren't to know that the cherry was off-date, and the sugar extremely thin.

I agree that there is more to life, but this forum is a vehicle for consumer issues (expressed openly), which is why there will be a lot of opposition and anger over the playablity of the game. It has improved considerably, and hopefully will continue to do so (despite the patches being rather reactionary, IMHO, in terms of certain graphical features) and I don't think there's anything healthy about dwelling on the issues and opinions of other users on the game. It's interesting to debate, but at the end of the day: one man's meat is another man's poison. People will always have different opinions on the game, and different experiences.
For instance, I believe that the minimum specs are aimed at showing the lowest-spec machine for which the game is able to run playably on at lowest settings. For some/(many?) with the lowest spec machine, this is impossible, as a large number have shown on these forums. Others may believe the specs are ridiculous to go by. As I say; different opinions, different experiences.

Have a nice friday :)

Oh yes you are... value, is purely subjective, trust need not enter the equation.

It does for people who are thinking rationally.

Not you then.

I'm not the one who thinks it's ok to give money to people I don't trust.

Dano don't feed the troll, he loves a good wind up.
We all know they lied about the state of the game pre release. Some people just don't like to admit it, even to themselves. You will notice that some of the most ardent believers quietly slipped away from the forum, under a cloud of incredulous disappointment I reckon. I will admit I was a huge supporter, and for me Oleg could do no wrong. Sucked me in hook line and sinker. That only works once though, and I bet the devs know it. At least I hope they do...
People seem to forget that even Luthier apologised about the state of the game.

Some people more than others....:rolleyes:

Heh... Nothing says "go ahead and whine about this for the next year" quite like an apology...

You said it all in your first paragraph..

That is to say there is really no need to say anymore than to point out it was speculation..

Because as we all know speculation is not a promise to provide! As I pointed out before, there is nothing actually advertised on the box or at STEAM download that we did not receive!

But if anyone is planing on hanging thier hat on that argument in thier class action law suit, i.e. a law suit to get their $50 buck back based on some feature Oleg might have commented on in some blogg or forum over the past 6+ years of CoD development.

Would you be so kind as to record the audio from the court room as you say that to the judge?

In that is such a rare occasion that we get to see a judge LOL as he waves to the bailiff to remove someone from his court room

Better yet have one of your buddies in the room whip his phone out and record the video to upload to youtube.. Should be a hoot! ;)

For the record I never pre ordered the game, Only a thick twat like yourself would consider that important in some way? Oh and for the record yes that is an insult.

You didn't? Sorry about that. I guess you didn't buy it until you were already aware of all the problems.

Not sure that someone who is dumb enough to buy a game which is loaded with problems is really in a position to be insulting anyone.

I should know better by now :)

What you going on about you fool?

Prom? prom dress?... If it bothers you that much go away, people can bitch, moan, kick up, stress as mush as they like regardless of cost..get yer head out yer a$$

Judging by your reply to my last post you obviously have no clue what your going on about do you 'Ace'?

Again..a lil clue, SOOOOO this game has the right to print what it likes on the back of its cover because it has a 'future proof engine'?

I think your find that every other vid game's 'recommended' spec's will allow the user to play the game on settings more than f-kin MED!

You go on about and bash the whiners here... Please dont insult mine and everyone elses intelligence by saying the game was fine on release but 'we' should of had better hardware to play it on!

P.S Im more than aware of IL2 and what it was like on its release..and Yes it happened then too but 'that' does not warrant it happening again or justify it..

f*k me, you actually sound like your saying there were no bugs, nothing wrong with the code, nothing wrong with the engine and it all comes down to hardware and that we should of known that 'recommended' means MED-HIGH end rigs can only play this game on LOW-MED settings

tool