|
Congrats devs
I just want to say congratulations and thank you for the hard work you've been putting into this sim. There were times when it felt a little grim, but bit by bit you've shown your dedication and work and honestly; the recent videos and screenshots and informational posts have really got me excited for every patch release. Playable vehicles? I mean, now we're talking about an entire virtual war going on! Crazy! The detail from ground level is surprisingly good... it's kind of ArmA2 level almost. If we got some infantry available? Fuggetaboutit! Very, very exciting.
I definitely noticed the graphical improvements. I said to myself in that new video, "why does their version look so much nicer than mine?" and then I realized that, duh, it's because they're using the latest patch. Stunning! And the fact that it runs smoother? Even better! SLI is getting there for me after many tweaks so my only hope is that it's also on the list of things to do. Just great. I can't help but ask about in-game comms (in regards to communicating with your wingman, home base, etc.) and AI behavior (I know you guys were asking help from the community, which is very cool of you to do by the way) simply because as the game is now it's pretty much limited to online play. I like online, but I love offline campaigns -- it's why I sim. It's tough to do when enemy AI moves like a banshee and you can't communicate with your wingman. Even then, I've enjoyed some of the campaigns that are already out there, broken as they may be. REGARDLESS, great work, and keep it up, and yeah...just...good stuff guys! Go team! |
+1
COD will only get better, as time passes, even more so when the SDK is released. Even when the developers are working on the sequels we will constantly see improvements to COD's, AI, Commands, FM, DM, and Graphics etc as these aspects will apply to all theaters. The new game engine and the continued addition of features will eventually make the original IL-2 series look and play like a 2001 combat flight sim. ;) |
Agreed. :-P
|
I'm with you guys on this one!
|
- 1 :)
and i want a patch that actually lets me play the sim on my mid level pc (as advertised on release) (i5-dual core @ 3.6, 8 mb ram, and ati 5770) having high hopes for the new patch, but more then 4 months now without any indications of release time |
Quote:
I do not share your optimism/enthusiasm about the progress of the game. It's now 1 year since the game was released & still many players cannot play the game on medium level machines, even those that meet the officialy advertised minimum specs. There are only a paultry number of player online in multi-players servers. There has been no indication that the dev's are correcting some of the fundemental flaws in the game. By this I do not mean FM's or minor cockpit graphic errors, I mean basic game elements that just don't work. (see http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=29858 ). A miriad of (sometimes fatal)online server console errors (server admins will know what I mean), indicating many flaws in the game code. Random launcher disconnections from the game. We don't even have proper skins on stationary aircraft, or have working air-raid sirens. There's no sign of any SDKs being released. There's no sign of a propper DCG, and the list goes on. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Tree sarcasm, but he .. you still there so you love the sim don t you ;) :)
|
I am being positive i do believe that the next patch will be a major step forward, as you all know zapatista ardently disagreed with me during development. However a year since release i think we are on the verge of getting what we paid for.
|
I'd rather have had what we've had for a year than still be waiting.
|
Thread clean up. Infractions issued.
|
Quote:
OK Tree, looks like youre getting an appology after all, I shouldn't have aimed a comment at you......genuinely I regret it. Sorry. |
Has it been confirmed that the 2nd vehicle video was made with the latest patch? I know the first flak gun one B6 said it was not...but the 2nd one is?
I do notice some of the newer plane engine sounds in the latest video, and the game seems to run at pretty nice fps. |
Quote:
+1 |
Quote:
the fact that luthier within a few months, as an "aside project" while 2 other main aspects are dealt with (complete overhaul of the gfx engine, and work on the Moscow scenery), can add in control of some ground vehicles and artillery, shows the depth of the coding and design that was worked on in the previous years under oleg's vision for the future now we "just need" the dynamic campaign, working coops, ground AI vehicle traffic and accurate supply lines provisioning troops and airfields etc, dynamic weather,.... ahh and can i have a 1e person controlled torpedo boat please so i can go and sink some big ships with please :) its all there under the hood, as long as luthiers small crew peddles hard enough on their little bikes to lead us to the promised land ! |
Quote:
|
If I had get a cent for every time I checked in here to look for news since October 2007, I would be rich by millions. Thank you devs for this enriching thought.
Cheers, ins |
Negative observations about the sim are acceptable as long as they are:
a) documented b) well-spoken/polite c) useful (eg, bug reports/how to reproduce bugs/workarounds, etc). Running around repeating "i was right" doesn't qualify, especially if it means repeating the same things on every thread, no matter how related or not, and sh*tting over everyone's parade in the process, with no concern for what other users might want to discuss in a thread they took the time to start. You are not superior to them, they have just as much right to voice their opinions here. This forum's purpose is not so a handful of people on both sides can argue for the sake of arguing and drown out the majority and i'll be damned if i stand by and tolerate it. I don't know how else to say it. Tree, if you want to gloat about the accuracy of your predictions start your own thread in the pilot's lounge. Everyone who feels compelled to answer to him should do it in that thread. You shall not dominate the forums to the expense of the majority here. I'm seriously fed up with the total disregard some of you display for your fellow forum members and the hindrance you pose to them using the forum and because of this, PMs to the tune of "i'm sorry, i take it back" are not accepted anymore because they've been proven unreliable and insincere one time too many. Offending parties, you have a day to edit the relevant posts yourselves before i delete them and talk to the other mods about instituting a new infraction type: repeatedly preventing other users from using the forum by pulling everything off-topic. |
+1 Three cheers, keep up the good work lads
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Poor Insu... |
I am in no way saying that the release and subsequent months following the release of this game wasn't a monumental cluster****. Only the people making the game would have the truest of understanding as to how that happened.
It's for that reason why I made the post. The game was released in a complete garbage state. PRE-alpha, many have said. A lot of companies would have, could have, packed it up, counted it as a loss, and started working on something else. The fact is, this new team seems determined to rebuild the name that is IL2. You can moan and gripe all you want about woulda-coulda-shoulda...it takes a looooonnng time for a dev team on what must be a shoestring budget (this isn't Modern Warfare here, guys) to take a completely broken game of this complexity and turn it into a bonafied sim. And for that, I think we should all take a moment to thank them for sticking with it and trying to give us what we all had hoped for in the first place. That only implies passion and dedication to the niche market of WWII combat flight simulation on the PC platform. Forgive, forget, move on, look to the future, all that stuff. It may run like crap on older machines...it runs OK at best on my lil' powerhouse I have...but the devs are making it better. Plus, they are giving us exactly what we asked for in the form of weekly updates to show us how they're making it better. I can think of only a handful of companies out there that do that, so we should all appreciate it. Play RoF in the meantime if you can't stomach it. I for one am just happy that this thing isn't dead. So, I repeat, go team! |
Quote:
Too bad so many seem to forget that |
I currently dont play CoD at all, mainly owing to CTD's and lack of time, but 1 year in and with much bad publicity etc, they are still working away on trying to get this sim right, that has to be encouraging and I see no reason that one day this wont rise to the top of the FS pile.
ROF has kept me sustained and also shown that over time even a quite badly broken sim can be fixed and shine, if this was a FPS it would have been dead in the water a long time ago, but thankfully it isn't. |
Thats because a few good FPS games come along every year or 2 with multi-million dollar development budgets and their popularity wanes after only 18months or so which is why they have to keep regurgitating the same thing over and over.
Flight Sims and for that matter Combat Sims of note only come along every 5-10years and last for 10years plus. So it must be accepted that there are longer development cycles with a longer payback cycle... That is why the team are still working on this despite the faultering start last year. Its a long term proposition and always has been. There is still no other challenger to the WWII air combat scenario right now with this level of fidelity and detail so I expect its popularity will increase this year as the patches and sequel roles out to fix the issues we all know to well. Have patience grasshoppers! ;) PS. Guys please stop the personal attacks and chest beating. Infractions have been dealt. |
Quote:
Quote:
people who believe in oleg's grand vision and supported him over the years with positive feedback, and contributed idea's and technical knowledge, didnt "get it all wrong during development ", just because in the last stage of the project there was a forced early release by the project financiers. SoW/BoB is becoming exactly what the grand vision intended, and as was originally envisaged by the grand master of ww2 sim makers. with integrated battle field scenario (vehicle, AA guns, and even some limited ship control), the ability for extensive AI routines with control over ground vehicles and supply lines, dynamic 24/7 campaign engine, improved flight models and aircraft detail, dynamic weather, and even eventually articulated skeletal human animations. from what the rest of us already know, most of these advanced elements are already present in a near completed state (and some are already being added now, like flak and vehicle control), since oleg developed the project in a modular form (with each area being worked on independently over the years) you can expect more goodies to be added soon (note; it is my hope developers will now focus on game play factors as their next step, or we simply end up with another era of air quake like many online servers in the old il2 days). what did happen, and you are deliberately misrepresenting, is that when they put these complex elements together in 2010 with the new grafix engine (while on track for their intended release date provided by oleg in late 2009), the grafix engine itself couldnt cope (or had major coding efficiency problems). given the complexity of gfx engines in 2010 era compared to the yr 1999, no quick solution could be found and a complete rewrite was impossible in that short time space. they tried 2 or 3 revamps of the gfx engine that year which were largely unsuccessful , then as pressure for the release date mounted and they were given an immovable release deadline, so they had to cut out major cpu/gpu drain elements (dynamic weather etc), and couldnt optimize the existing gfx engine enough, or had the time to complete the last parts on some elements like AI control etc.. in short, hadnt there been the forced release (with the regretful loss of oleg as visionary developer as a likely direct result), it would have taken them roughly another year to finish it and release the new sim in a playable state, allowing them to rapidly add all the more advanced and complex features (envisaged, developed and incorporated from the start) as the series evolved. but dont let accurate factual information get in the way of the perpetual negative slant you deliberately put on all things oleg or SoW-BoB, its just that for anybody familiar with events as they occurred during development, the truth is rather different |
While overall i'm pretty dissapointed with what we have I do agree that if the fundamental bugs get ironed out ( ai being the most lacking ) things will improve alot. Once/If the SDK comes out things will move along rapidly.
|
Quote:
Well put zapatista, I'm with you on that. |
Quote:
|
Good lord, Il-2 fan fiction.
|
Quote:
That means, after that needed 1 year development-phase will be finished in just about one week and of course with the reinforced team, CloD will be completed on March, 1st. One of us will be surprised, then, I guess. |
Quote:
we are about to receive a large patch that addresses the main gfx engine performance issue that has been the biggest problem since original release. iirc this patch has been about 4 months in the making so far, not 12. - had there been no forced release 12 months ago, these problems could have been addressed earlier (ie a rewrite of the gfx engine would have been possible much earlier, rather then try and persevere under significant pressure to fix the older buggy one that had all the problems during the pre release year). - other modular elements of the "grand vision" of the future of il2/SoW are already coded and developed (we have seen lots of information on this in the last 3 or 4 development years prior to release), which means many could be added in relatively quickly without having to be developed from scratch (as we just saw with flak control and some ground vehicles) my hope is that if indeed this new patch corrects some of the major performance issues (as luthiers latest posts on this seems to indicate), that they can then focus in the following months/weeks on resolving some of the other unfinished or major buggy elements they didnt have time to address before release: like coop function, dynamic campaign engine, offline content, user ability to script missions and create semi automated AI routines (with a purpose made interface with the correct documentation, etc), or deal with elements they couldnt address because they were direct sub element of the current game/gfx engine that were being rewritten and recoded (like flight models or individual plane performance characteristics) imo the main bottle neck is for the dreaded gfx engine performance problems to be solved have a look at the Russian forum thread, seems the patch release is imminent, we'll know soon enough :) |
I wonder why they didn't rewrite the engine straight after release. We might be further along that line now Zap.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Maybe because it was so dire when first released they needed to just improve the playerbility as a priority? Once that that was done they had a bit of time to work on the real underlying issues and fix things properly. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I'd be happy to be the surprised of the two of us. But: I won't defend a patch nor praise it nor start a "the world of CloD is safe"-thread, without ANY information at all, what is actually in this patch, when it will be released and if it will bring CloD no matter how much closer to where it should have been 1 year ago. In other words: This discussion is based on thin air and personal perception on both sides. |
what i can defend is that i believe we have seen enough evidence over the years to support the fact that large elements of a very complex and sophisticated next gen flightsim have already been built into the SoW series during the latter years of development, which means they should be able to add them in rapidly one the performance issue is resolved (and we have just seen direct evidence of this with the AA gun control and added vehicles)
given i have very serious problems running CoD at all on my current mid level pc, you can call me an optimist, albeit a well informed one with a good memory of what we were shown and told over the many years of development :) |
Quote:
|
the anti-epilepsy problem was over exploited in an attempt to justify the way CLoD was released IMO. but that's all water under the bridge now...
|
Quote:
|
i mean i don't believe that things were coming along or radically better with CLoD, then came the said AE filter and damn, it all went upside down.
if the devs were having trouble putting it all together, and they certainly were, well the allegedly last minute implementation of an image filter (due to publisher demand) certainly didn't help. so when CLoD was released, some justification by the devs was in order, even if it had to be partial and discussable at best. we're talking politics and marketing issues here, where truth officially has a very relative meaning. anyway we have no proof one way or the other, it's a guess as others have been making.. and as i said it really doesn't matter much now; it's a wait and see what they can do to fix this. next patch seems to be the real test for the dev team |
I agree, this patch is very important and i hope its the patch the devs, the forum and everybody hopes it is.
Good luck to them. |
Things got a little off-topic here and I apologize if I added any additional work for the mods by starting this thread.
I simply wanted to show some appreciation, not defend or accuse anyone of anything. Just trying to generate some positivity. Go team. |
No worries really. All opinions, negative and positive, are welcome. It's manners (or the lack of them) we care about when moderating, not opinions.
As for your "responsibility" or to be accurate, the lack of it, as long as your posts are respectful of other people you got nothing to fear. It's obvious you started a thread in good intentions, it's not your fault it got slightly off-topic. Also, even off-topic tangents can have merit and threads are allowed to go on as a result. I would also like to extend an offer to any user, if at any point they want help to maintain a thread they started on its intended track, they are welcome to post in their thread and request it. We now have enough moderators to cover all timezones and it wouldn't be a stretch to say that more than 95% of threads are actually being read by us. If at any time you (or anyone else) wants some help maintaining a thread, you don't even have to PM us. Just post in your thread and request help. You might want a thread clean up, or just splitting off-topic parts to a separate thread. Just post in your thread and ask (reasonable stuff of course, ie, we won't do anything if someone tells us to "delete posts of people that don't agree with me" if those people post within the rules :-P ) |
No pun intended and I read you loud and clear Blackdog..:)
This next patch needs to be a doozy. I want it to be a doozy...Old WWII American verbiage...meant in the positive. No one can reasonably expect that it will fix everything. I do believe that it must address the most serious issues and that patches in the future, must come sooner. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 10:13 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.