|
Oleg's Russian Interview Translated
Most of you have probably seen this interview by now. It contains some interesting pictures, including many never before seen. Oleg asked me to translate it into English to save everyone the headache of trying to make sense of online translations. So here it is!
Part I http://spread-wings.ru/content/view/154/1/ «The accomplishment I’m most proud of is the fact that people in the West finally began to properly call the Il-2 a Shturmovik and not a Stormovik» --Oleg Maddox We have a special guest at «spread wings» today, Oleg Maddox, the creator of the famous IL-2 Sturmovik flight sim. Il-2 entered the lives of many people around the world a few years ago. It set a new quality standard for products of this kind, and we can be certain that no one will manage to meet it in the near future. Now virtual pilots anxiously await a new simulator from Maddox Games titled «Storm of War: Battle of Britain». Based on what we know, it should impress us even more than Il-2. We talked with Oleg about «Battle of Britain», the impact Il-2 had, his future, and many other things that may be of interest to virtual pilots everywhere. Q: Oleg, Il-2 had a very long lifespan for a flight simulator, probably the longest ever. What do you expect from BoB? Will it break Il-2’s longevity record? A: Battle of Britain was specifically designed to have an even bigger growth potential than Il-2. Only time will tell whether it does manage to survive as long as Il-2. I would like that very much. Q: When developing Il-2 and BoB, how do you balance the two opposites, avoiding the tendency to move towards arcade simplicity on one hand, while also not allowing your work to drift into a complicated study sim with every button and switch having to be operated with the mouse? A: That’s simple. I always keep in mind my huge experience interacting with users all over the world. The overriding principle is this. We would all like to fly an aircraft that's been modeled as close to reality as possible. However, pressing all the little buttons and switches is something only the select few enjoy. I know plenty of real-world pilots who aren’t interested in the minutia. Even the people who are interested in this will usually just try it once, and then they’ll turn it off in the options. As a pilot friend of mine said, “I’m interested in the pleasure of flight, not the masochism of pre-flight.” Q: Oleg, you’ve previously said that after Battle of Britain is released, you could be open to passing the IL-2 source code to third parties for future development, with your quality control. Are there any updates on the issue? A: So far we have received no viable offers. Q: Il-2 offered nearly 300 flyable WWII-era planes from Allied and Axis countries. We would be very interested to learn of the participation of real veterans of the war, what they fought of the sim, and how close it was in their opinion to the real feel of WWII aerial combat. Do you have any anecdotes on this subject? Were there any cases of former enemies meeting in your virtual skies? A: We have consulted with numerous combat veterans, including many from WWII. However we’ve received the most valuable feedback from contemporary pilots who fly vintage aircraft today and are also experienced with flight simulators. We work with several of them. The feedback we’ve received from veterans across the board was the same. Il-2 was the best out of everything they’ve tried. They of course understand that all flight sims have limitations, and 100% realism is impossible by definition, despite the fact that some other developers attempt to make claims to that… Generally, the feedback from testers and advisors of this kind is most valuable, since only they can describe their impression of the intimate details of the plane’s behavior. Regarding WWII veterans, unfortunately we only have feedback from them from the West. One such quote is printed in the Forgotten Battles manual. They mostly thank us for the opportunity to go back to the spirit of those days, and to show their grandsons how they fought. One of our fans from Germany wrote to me about how his grandfather took time to learn the PC specifically to be able to fly Il-2. I also have a greeting card from one of the most famous German aces. All the pilots do agree on one other thing, that a table-mounted joystick feels very different from a floor-mounted control stick. They do agree that our recommended control settings are best at minimizing this difference. Q: We know that BoB will have player interacting with ground-based radar, which should be very interesting. Is there anything being done about setting up online crews for multi-seat aircraft in BoB, something that was sorely missing from Il-2? This would greatly increase the interest in bombers in the game. A: You will be able to do that, to set up multi crews both online and offline. Q: You’ve previously stated in an interview that BoB will have 11 [flyable] aircraft. Did that number change? A: No, it did not change. But this is not counting all the sub-variants. Q: You’ve also previously stated that BoB will ship with a single gameplay map for all the combat of the period. What set of maps will be provided for online gameplay? A: We will have addiotional small maps for online. I don’t know how many yet. As many as we can do. Q: Another question about online maps. As a server host, I’ve never felt I had enough of them with Il-2. Murmansk, Burma, Leningrad: those maps were great due to their huge span, attention to detail, and the number of objects and points of interest. However for the very same reasons they were useless for online servers. Why did you decide not to make small versions of those maps for online games, released simultaneously with large offline maps? And with extra airfields, of course? It would be great if BoB had the possibility of creating your own grass and concrete fields when editing online maps. Will that be possible? Test runways as they exist in Il-2 are, unfortunately, not enough to create a full-fledged airfield. A: This is actually hard work. However, with Il-2 technology, we couldn't just cut up an exiting map, we'd have to create whole new maps. Our technology did not permit us to easily cut things out. With BoB, you will be able to create your own online maps. This means entire maps from start to finish, including airfields. But this will happen after the main release. We’ll release authoring tools later, as soon as we can, including map creation tools, object insertion tools, etc. Generally, things here will be much better than with Il-2. Q: Will the server part of BoB be released simultaneously with the game? A: Of course Q: What will change with the ground object damage model in BoB? Ground vehicles in Il-2 do not always act as their real counterparts can be expected to, based on their characteristics, characteristics of the attacking plane, and the specifics of the ordnance used. A: Calculations will be more precise. Q: We are also aware of the statement you’ve made a long time ago about rough estimation of system requirements for BoB. You’ve said it will run well on a machine that can comfortably run Il-2 at max settings. Do you have a better defined set of system requirements for BoB? A: Not yet. It’s impossible to say at this point. Things are very fluid. Q: When playing Il-2 offline, many commented on inadequate AI behavior. Completing offline campaigns offered little excitement for that very reason. Will the quality of AI change with BoB? A: Oh really? Have you seen better AI in any other sim? Generally, it was offline gameplay that drove most of our sales, and not the online modes. Of course, it’s more exciting to fly against a live opponent. AI will be smarter in BoB. We’ll even consider whether the pilot is tired or hurt, whether he’s a good shot or a master of aerobatics, and whether he’s a trooper or a coward. Other things, too… I’ve said too much already :) Q: Realistic modeling of small details is impossible without original drawings and archival data. How do you work with archives here in Russia and in other countries? Are they willing to cooperate? How is that aspect set up in your team? How important is it to you to work with third parties in Il-2 and BoB, and how interested are you in such cooperation? A: We probably have much better contacts with people who have their own private collections of data than with government archives. Third party assistance is crucial in our process. Whether it’s international or here in Russia, all work with archives has the same basis: pay money and you can access anything they’ve got. No money, no help. Q: After the Il-2 code was cracked, how seriously do you approach security when designing BoB? Will this be an entirely new protection scheme, or an improvement of the Il-2 method? A: Online protection code will be all new. However, the sim code itself will not be protected as much, in order to allow others to create their own add-ons. This will not affect fairness online. We’re taking special measures for that. [Luthier’s note: standard set of features for online games will be protected and unchangeable; each online server will choose whether to only allow these locked Maddox-approved features, or whether to also allow user mods.] Q: Did you consider gameplay balance when designing Il-2? Did you try to keep all sides balanced, or did you not concern yourself with that, and simply work in stages to add new planes to the game without worrying how they might affect the balance of power? How will this be addressed in BoB? A: We never thought about balance for a second. We modeled whatever we had good data on that permitted us to have a sufficiently accurate representation in game. There have always been rumors that we specifically fiddle with performance characteristics or select specific planes in order to maintain online balance. We did change things, that’s true. But we didn’t do that for balance, but rather to conform to new more accurate data as we gained access to it. The same will be the case with BoB. We won’t balance anything to keep the sides equal online. Anyway, it’s not the plane, it’s the pilot. You win by working together in a group, using superior tactics, and knowing your plane’s capabilities. Q: Online server commanders from external developers are now used online. Are you planning to release an online commander of your own with BoB? A: We’re planning it. Don’t know it’ll be right away. Q: What new or different things will be see in BoB online compared to Il-2? Any surprises? A: Pretty much only the Dogfight mode will remain from Il-2, and even that will be updated. Q: Oleg, we have some intel that the next add-on after BoB will be the Mediterranean. Can you let us know how soon that’ll be released? And another even more important question: how soon after BoB can we expect the Eastern Front again, and what are you planning for it? A: Your intel is nothing but a rumor. Even I myself don’t know whether it’ll be Africa or something else. Everything depends on the success of BoB on the market. Of course, no one has done a comprehensive MTO sim, save for a few unfinished or unsuccessful attempts. Eastern Front or the Pacific will perhaps be the most difficult to develop out of all options. So you should probably not expect to fly Soviet planes immediately after BoB. Q: Is the worldwide economic crisis affecting the development or quality of BoB? Can you generally tell us where you are in terms of progress? A: Quality will not be affected. Timeline – we shall see. Right now we’re about 60% there, probably even more. [Luthier’s note: not 60% in terms of time, but 60% in terms of features.] Q: Battle of Britain was a crucial point in British history. We know how the Brits feel about the battle and what it did to showcase their fighting spirit. Is the British government or other British entities aware of your work on this sim? What was their reaction? Are they providing any help? A: Their reaction was positive. I think we’ll see some support from them in the final stages of development and after the release. Q: Oleg, many virtual pilots know you as the person who created the most exciting virtual world, as the creator of Il-2. But not everyone knows that you have another passion in addition to aviation in photography, and that you’re a true professional there as well. So is this Oleg Maddox the photographer who also likes aviation, or Oleg Maddox the aviation enthusiast who also likes photography? What’s primary here, and how do you manage to combine the two? Also, do you have any other hobbies? A: Photography is a hobby. Occasionally it does bring some extra income, when I get published in magazines or calendars. Most of my published work is my underwater photography. I was into photography and diving since childhood. There was a time when I completely abandoned both hobbies and did nothing but work. But thanks to my good friend Gena (Gennadich) I eventually got back into it. My skill with photography and my professional equipment helps me with work as well. For example, if I visit a museum, I’ll note the smallest detail of every aircraft, and know how to properly photograph it from the proper angles to make it easier to model in 3D. Such photographs are invaluable addition to blueprints. Seeing the world with a photographer’s eyes helps me strive for a photorealistic 3D world in my games, as much as possible given technological limitations of course. Q: It’s no secret that Il-2 introduced many people to the world of aviation and changed their entire view of WWII and the Great Patriotic War. People went beyond simply flying and shooting. By studying historical aircraft they got into the overall time period, going well beyond aviation. For many, especially for young people, Il-2 became a starting point for their fascination with our country’s history and its place in the world. In other words, Il-2 was a patriotic injection of sorts, in the most positive sense of the word. Were these contributions to educating our youth somehow acknowledged by our government or some other organizations in this country? A: As far as our side goes… Let’s say it this way. Employees of the Monino museum appreciated our work. Some wonderful people in Khanty-Mansiysk in Siberia who hold important government jobs also appreciated Il-2 and organized a large Il-2 competition. The military liked it. Especially in Byelorussia, as far as I know. But the government probably didn’t appreciate our contribution. I will also add that Il-2 also played an important role in shaping international opinion of the Eastern Front of WWII. I’ve received numerous letters thanking me for this, including such quotes as “you’ve opened our eyes” and “we’ve finally seen the war’s history from a different perspective and learned things that had been suppressed or perverted in the West.” I’ve also received many letters from Germany for focusing on this part of the war that was almost unknown in the West. Generally, there were a lot of letters like that, from people of all ages, young and old. The global outcome is that many English-language sources, books and TV documentaries, finally begin to call the Il-2 a Sturmovik (pronounced SHturmovik), and not a Stormovik. I consider that my biggest personal accomplishment. I’ve had to explain to western historians why it’s pronounced ‘Shturmovik’ too many times. The only people who said it right were the Germans, because the word Sturm in the plane’s name is of course of German origin. It entered the Russian language during the times of Peter the Great. Q: The release of Il-2: 1946 added many prototype aircraft to the game, which was an interesting, risky step to take. Why did your team decide to go in that direction, into alternative history, rather than focus on adding some more historical WWII-era planes? A: First of all, it wasn’t all that risky. We did have to show the world that the MiG-9 was awesome! Secondly, other developers have long promised to do this, but we finally did it right! Then, we needed to set the record straight for those who believed that some Luftwaffe projects could have taken to the air during the war, if only it lasted a little longer. For example with the Lerche we’ve shown, or rather written in the text, that based on modern calculations the plane wouldn’t even take off. It wouldn’t land either without computers and fly-by-wire controls. So we’ve recalculated a lot of specs and added computer-assisted controls. Generally we did try to model those planes that would actually fly, with the exception of the Lerche of course. We’ve also shown that a forward-swept wing would not have worked at the time, I've written about that as well I think. Junkers designs completed in Russia after the war showed just that by losing to Ilyushins. Technologies simply did not exist back then to counter the flutter. Although from the aerodynamic standpoint forward-swept wings do have their advantages, of course. Q: You’ve mentioned in many interviews that your wife really helps you with work-related matters and inspires you. If that’s the case, can we ask if she’s ever flown Il-2, and if so, is she active online? The thing is, most Il-2 pilots being male, a lot of them experienced relationship problems due to the sim. Initial frustration on the female's part eventually either evolves into acceptance, since it’s obvious nothing can be done, or, which happens very rarely, the wife or girlfriend gets into Il-2 herself. So what does your wife think about this, not about your success, which probably can’t fail to impress any woman, but about your virtual flying and everything connected to it? A: This reminds me of something. I was in the UK a few years ago attending a Flight Simulator show, dominated by Microsoft Flight Simulator stands and products. I’ve had a press conference on Forgotten Battles a little while before its release. About 300 people attended, which didn’t even fit the small conference hall. This was about 10 times as many as attended the Microsoft press conference an hour before. I’ve spoken Russian during the conference, on purpose, and my good friend Ian Boys acted as an interpreter. After my speech I took some free questions, again assisted by Ian Boys. There was one question however where I didn’t wait for a translation and answered in English. The question was, what should a poor Il-2 fan do if his wife doesn’t let him play? My answer was very brief: get a new wife. The audience erupted in laughter. In any case, I’m very lucky to have my wife. Q: Oleg, I understand that everything connected with development of Il-2 and BoB takes up a lot of time. However, do you still fly, or did you fly online in your spare time? A: I used to fly online almost every day. Now I fly only occasionally, with my son, and offline. I fly about and line him up, then let him shoot. He can’t get enough of it. He can’t master the flying itself, the joystick is a bit too big for him. However, when just flying around, by now he knows what to do even without my help. At work I don’t even have Il-2 installed on my work computer, due to lack of space and all the time I spent on BoB. But some in my team do continue to fly Il-2 online all the time. Q: Oleg, thank you for taking the time to answer our questions. I’d like to wish you continuing good luck and may all your dreams come true. Thank you from all the sim fans worldwide for getting us hooked on the virtual and real skies. A: Thank you! Good luck! Questions asked by Aleksandr Kazakov (AleX) Part II http://spread-wings.ru/content/view/156/42/ Make sure to check out all the screenshots, and hit Play on the video down at the bottom of the page! «Our main goal is to outdo ourselves.» --Oleg Maddox Today, Oleg Maddox answered the questions he didn’t have time to answer the last time. He also illustrated his answers with screenshots and a small video.[/b] Q: Oleg, considering that your progress with Battle of Britain is over 60%, as you’ve said, we’re getting the impression that working on BoB is taking too long, for example compared to Il-2. Is that correct? A: I wouldn’t say that. Il-2 Sturmovik was in development for 4 years before its 2001 release. First we built the engine, then everything else. Then we continued making various improvements and built a new 3D engine (the Perfect mode that shipped with Forgotten Battles was in fact a whole new 3D engine). All this work took another 4 years before Il-2 1946. That’s a total of 8 years, 4 of them spent on updates and expansions. We initially wanted to make Battle of Britain on the Il-2 engine. However that would be the last thing we could do with it. And then what? The engine was beginning to show its age by that time, despite many revolutionary features which Il-2 brought to the genre in 2001, and which many developers have tried to replicate since. By 2005 we’ve finally realized that we had to build a new engine. First only one person worked on it, then two, all while continuing to work on Il-2 as well. We’ve really switched over to BoB only after all work on Il-2 was completed, i.e. in 2007. So BoB’s only been in development for 2 years now. It isn’t all that much compared to all the goals we’re trying to achieve. The tasks at hand are enormous. We want to outdo ourselves, and of course all those who claim that they’re better than Il-2 (which they finally get to claim years after we’ve stopped all work on the product). So far we haven’t even spent the time on BoB that we spent making the original Il-2. Speaking of other developers, we’ve given one team the entire Il-2 source code a long time ago, and they were supposed to release their sim even before 1946 in order to turn a profit. However they decided instead to make their own engine, etc. It still drags on, so how long has that been in development now? I hope this example makes it clear to everyone that anything not based on an existing engine takes a lot of time. Q: You’ve stated many times in previous interviews that BoB will be drastically different from the Il-2 series. What do you mean by that? A: Not a very easy question to answer, but I’ll try to respond the best I can without divulging some secret information. 1. The engine and the system we’re developing is built from the ground up to allow future expansions. Each new product can be stand-alone, or it can plug in with the others starting with BoB, following the success of Pacific Fighters which proved that this model can be viable. 2. We’re developing a system that is more than just a flight sim, but can be a sub sim, PT boat sim, tank sim, helicopter sim, etc. By the way, we just might have a flyable autogyro in BoB. 3. We’re also writing a completely new, drastically improved online code with multiple modes and features. It can even support a server-based MMO with a monthly fee. This of course won’t happen with BoB itself, but is possible on its engine, possibly made by other teams that further develop into this direction. 4. Quality level for ground and air objects is ages beyond what was one with Il-2. I don’t think that such a huge leap will be possible after BoB; the only changes that can happen is increase in polycount or texture size, or more detailed interior details. Even Il-2 was often used as a reference by other developers, and BoB will even have uses for movies. 5. We’re working on an add-on and expansion module that will not affect the online playing field. After BoB is released we plan to publish a set of tools that will allow end-users to: * Create new planes; * Create new vehicles, tanks, ships, etc; * Create new static objects, such as building, bridges, equipment, etc; * Create new maps, with limits on total size. We’ll leave large maps for ourselves, for our own new sims. Of course, to do any of that end users will need to have experience with other 3rd party software, such as 3D modeling suites. There are a lot of people that have the required skills around the world, of course, including right here in this country. Even just the few details I’ve listed above should give you an idea of all the possibilities we have with BoB. One of the consequences is that a whole industry can pop up around BoB similar to that around Microsoft Flight Simulator, creating add-ons for it, also considering the online fairness with BoB. We can also expect a large number of new aircraft to become available soon after BoB’s release, including Soviet planes. One Russian plane will even ship with BoB, the Su-26. We’ve built it following many requests from pilots around the world. Many in the West are also asking for the Yak-52. You can see how different BoB will be from Il-2 in this respect. In Il-2 we had to develop or insert all new objects ourselves, specifically for the purposes of maintaining cheater-free online gameplay. Remember that we’ve released a huge number of these add-ons for free. Q: Will there be free expansions for BoB, like there were for Il-2? Or will all expansions be commercial, considering the current state of the economy? A: We will definitely continue releasing free expansions. However we won’t be able to do as much as before. We’ll adopt more of other people’s work and include them in the standard cheater-free online list. But it’s a bit too early to talk about this. However, we do have one plane already in the works for just such a free expansion. Q: Let’s go back to BoB maps once again. This is a very exciting topic. How will they be different from Il-2 maps? A: First of all, they will be more detailed. This means all sorts of small details you will notice in flight, with terrain, buildings, roads, etc. Not exactly on topic of maps, but we’ll also have moving grass. Secondly, we will have dynamic weather. This is actually on topic of maps. Even though the weather is handled by a separate weather module, it’ll be tied into the gameplay maps and affected by topography. Thirdly, we’ll have more detailed coastlines. We’ll now have cliffs, not just flat painted textures, but with real elevation. Next, our roads will have smooth curves of various profiles, which will immediately make the terrain look more realistic. In conjunction with new photorealistic textures, new technologies, new light and shading, all of the above will work together to create something that from the air looks really, really close to reality. Q: And now Oleg, please go into more details on your thoughts of the future of Storm of War compared to Il-2, given the potential you’ve built into the engine from the start. A: Considering what I’ve said already, and given an initial commercial success of BoB, here’s what I see: 1. Some number of developers internationally that worked with MSFS, and probably a large part of them too, will convert to our side. This is especially to be expected considering the recent closing of Aces studio. So these add-on developers might just start making add-ons for Storm of War. I think this might even include jets, including modern ones. At the very least I would expect someone to do Vietnam, not to mention WWI. This should happen too. Generally WWI aircraft are easier to model and program, since they don’t have such complex aerodynamics, no retractable landing gear, propeller pitch, and other advanced devices. There’s also no radio, which means there’s no need to develop and record radio chatter. 2. Korea, in conjunction with RRG. Its development is now in background mode. Their team is now working with us finishing up planes for BoB, and also modeling ships. 3. Africa, Malta, USSR. These are most appealing choices for us. Even though we know for sure that the Pacific is the most interesting subject matter for the international market, besides Battle of Britain that is. Generally the Eastern Front is a bit easier for us to do since we have loads more data on it, and there’s less variety of vehicles and aircraft to model than all the other fronts. 4. Continuing combat around the English Channel, which will largely be made via expansions since we’ll already have the main map. 5. Cooperation with other teams to create other games (perhaps by selling the engine). For example, an MMO with controllable soldiers and submarines etc. Or even a space sim around planet surfaces with somewhat realistic physics :) 6. Console variants with simplified features. Q: Virtually all flight sim fans graduate to online modes after first flying offline campaigns and earning their triple HSUs or Oak Leaves. This will probably be the case with BoB as well. So, how different will offline campaigns be in BoB compared to Il-2? A: I’ll answer briefly for now: 1. An entire new dynamic campaign engine, often with unpredictable results and random elements. So far this still needs lots of testing and fine-tuning. 2. Possibility of creating static campaign missions with random branching, if so desired by the end-user. We’ll leave the second option for end-user add-ons. Creating campaigns like that is more historically realistic. However even the first option will have some user-modifiable options, and it may even permit users to make their own add-ons. Q: Oleg, what is your favorite plane in Il-2? In BoB? A: Hard to say. With the huge number of options of Il-2, I did mostly prefer the Bf-109K-4, if it was allowed on a server. Occasionally I liked to boom-n-zoom in Focke-Wulfs and in the I-185, whenever I saw that I was the smartest one in the dogfight and everyone else was circling around down below. With BoB, I will probably prefer the Spitfire, at least in the beginning before other planes become available. Out of the more exotic, I’ll definitely enjoy the autogyro with its completely unique flying technique. We’ve even involved a real autogyro pilot in our development. And if we do make the second crewman taking potshots at 109s with a rifle, that’ll be very British indeed! By the way, the autogyro will be very difficult to shoot down due to its extreme low speed. Q: Thank you for taking the time to answer our questions, Oleg! We simply can’t wait for BoB, and look forward for more interviews. Good luck! A: Thank you! Questions asked by Aleksandr Kazakov (AleX) |
Thanks Luthier ! ;):-P
Best Regards, Macwan. |
Fantastic, thanks a lot!
Sadly, it's become quite rare to hear from Oleg, so a good interview is a real treat. |
Hallelujah!!!
|
Thanks Luthier, much easier to pick up on all the details with a proper translation.
Much appreciated. |
Thanks a bunch Luthier!
|
Thankyou for all the effort luthier.
|
Thanks for the update, and in response to one of the answers, please at some point get us to the Pacific.
|
Thanks Luthier.
Much appreciated. :) Wheelsup |
Thanks for sharing!
Sounds very promising! :cool: |
Thanks Luthier. ;)
|
If they manage to pull this off.... i have nothing to say. Engine that could be used for all of the scenarios Oleg mentioned... speechless, really.
Oh, but i do know of one FS with far better AI that from what IL2 has :P |
This is the best interview that I have read to date, very little dodgeing and weaving. Every answer full of information for the future of SOW. The 60% content vs. time statement is reassuring to me. I think SOW will be bigger that FS, and in much much less time.
|
Quote:
Quote:
:rolleyes: Thanks for the detailed translation Luthier |
Very interesting read !! Thumbs up !!
Oleg you're THE man !!! |
Suddenly I feel optimistic again. Thanks Luthier! Thanks Oleg!
|
Nice article. I find this quote interesting:
"All the (veteran) pilots do agree on one other thing, that a table-mounted joystick feels very different from a floor-mounted control stick." That's exactly why I started building a simpit. I don't really want to build a huge cockpit in my room, but it was the only way to implement a proper floor-mounted stick. And this: "The same will be the case with BoB. We won’t balance anything to keep the sides equal online. Anyway, it’s not the plane, it’s the pilot. You win by working together in a group, using superior tactics, and knowing your plane’s capabilities." Very well said! |
Quote:
Lots of thanks for not forgotting this! |
Greetings Salutations Salute !
Quote:
It is common practice for my wife to show friends around the house, and my office is not off-limits in her little escapades. My wife chortles 'giggles noisily" when she trys to explain to other persons of her ilk (non-simmers)that I fly the computer with that stuff. You'd be surprised at the response of people. They do strange things like...roll their eyes, turn-a-way shaking their head. They also make that noise where they press their tongue on the back of their upper front teeth and suck their tongue and make a little tsk tsk sound. I just put my stuff (the good stuff) in a cabinet, until I'm ready to do some damage to my little neighbors (the AI or online enemy). Hope everyone has a great day. It was excellent getting a good update from Oleg... Ahhhh! nowfor another cup o' coffee. |
Well, the point regarding development time and the sim being 60% complete is a good point. Getting to the 60% completion stage took much longer because of the things they had to develop first. He says things should move along much more quickly now and that they've been doing some parallel development along the way.
He didn't give a date, but I get the feeling things will heat up dramatically this summer. ;) |
Greetings Salutations Salute !
Quote:
It is common practice for my wife to show friends around the house, and my office is not off-limits in her little escapades. My wife chortles 'giggles noisily" when she trys to explain to other persons of her ilk (non-simmers)that I fly the computer with that stuff. You'd be surprised at the response of people. They do strange things like...roll their eyes, turn-a-way shaking their head. They also make that noise where they press their tongue on the back of their upper front teeth and suck their tongue and make a little tsk tsk sound. Just put my stuff (the good stuff) in a cabinet, until I'm ready to do some damage to my little neighbors (the AI or online enemy). Oleg is on target. This IL2 raised my awareness for the first time about the Soviet airwar. Americans have been in information blackout on Russia and still are for the most part. I have bought up every Russian air war book I found for these past years. Hope everyone has a great day. It was excellent getting a good update from Oleg... Ahhhh! nowfor another cup o' coffee. |
great! thanks! all very good to hear
|
Quote:
|
:shock:
Thank you Luthier for the translation. And thank you Oleg for providing us with a wonderful update. |
Quote:
@ nearmiss: I'm glad my wife, my family and my friends are pretty interested in my hobby, though they don't share the patience to dig into this genre. |
Amazing!
WoW! That is probably the most detailed information Oleg has shared with us thus far. Sure a lot of it he mentioned before but not this detailed.
Amazing stuff and the combat flightsim genre could not look any brighter IMHO! Thanks for sharing! |
I guess with M$ Flight Sim out of the way SOW may fill the void for all those third party developers making expansion packs. It all looks good!
|
@nearmiss ... LOL mate, I know exactly where you're coming from.
When the "naive" come over to my house and give me the "your an adult for goodness sake!?" look, I can guarantee that 99% of time after I sit them down and let them at the controls, they have new a respect for why I enjoy it so much. As Bearcat once said ... this is my hobby. Be proud as a simmer! @Luthier thanks for the translation!! |
I hear you Codex.
Long long ago (mid 90's?) my friend told me about some WW1 dogfighting he would do at work. I don't remember the name of the game because I THINK this may have even been before Red Baron series. He was playing against a friend either on line or on a lan. He was so excited telling me about it. Of course my interest wa s highly kindled. I wasn't into computers at the time, but was still enthralled thinking of downing my own Albatros. Flash forward until about 4 years ago. I have a full HOTAS set up, Track IR etc etc AND IL2FB/PF. My friend comes for a visit and sees all this paraphenalia om my computer desk. He surprisingly scoffed when I told him what it was. I got the old rolling of the eyes when I told him about Track IR (good thing I had the hat instead of the stickers I put on the bridge of my glasses ;) ). I told him to sit down. I turned on the surround sound. Put on the hat and reflector. Showed him a few controls and fired up a QMB. He's always had a fascination with Russia so I set him up in a MiG over Moscow. For someone who just looked at me rather askance when viewing my sim set up I couldn't get him away from the computer. 3:30 in the morning and he's now in a Wildcat with no sign of getting out. It was fun watching him try taking off in the MiG with the opposiye torque. He was amazed at that little detail, while being frustrated. LOL We've all been there I said. Yeah, I think he found a new respect for the hobby. |
3:30 a.m. ? I guess he's taken it ... hook, line and sinker. :mrgreen:
|
Wow great update!This opens up all sorts of possibilties for flight sims!Imagine someone like VRS Porting their F-18 superbug into SOW with a new modern map only with full weapons!and another developer porting in a SU-27! bam!!
Only an example(and my mind getting carried away!) but judging by that interview it's very possible to do it if someone were so inclined. Hell they could do the same with falcon4! Yep good times for simmer ahead :) |
Quote:
Of course for all of us Final Conflict affectionados. This time 'we' stop the Battle of Britain from happening as opposed to trying to stop Pearl Harbour. LOL |
Ha! I loved that movie!I was always disapointed that they had to return to the carrier before the had a chance to wipe out the attack force,would of made for a sweet scene.
Mmmm i wonder if that movie's down the the video store :P |
Quote:
Yep I think that we will see alot of varity. Not sure that I agree that Oleg would approve of a F-18, but you never know:-P anyway it should be a very interesting and challenging next decade with the SOW engine. The possibilities are endless,and exciting to think and dream of. |
Thank you Luthier. It is always nice to hear what Oleg has to say. Great stuff in there.
|
Quote:
Q: And now Oleg, please go into more details on your thoughts of the future of Storm of War compared to Il-2, given the potential you’ve built into the engine from the start. A: Considering what I’ve said already, and given an initial commercial success of BoB, here’s what I see: 1. Some number of developers internationally that worked with MSFS, and probably a large part of them too, will convert to our side. This is especially to be expected considering the recent closing of Aces studio. So these add-on developers might just start making add-ons for Storm of War. I think this might even include jets, including modern ones. Looks like it's on the cards if developers want to step up to the challange.That certainly doesnt guarantee it'll happen I know but it's pretty exciting to know that it's possible. SOW if most definitely gunna rock in a very massive way! :) |
I stand corrected:grin:...lets hope for really diverse future
|
Quote:
Flyingbullseye |
I know several people who are into flight sims but never tried il2 because they were into commercial flight, I hope that the FSX addon crowd starts making commercial stuff on the SoW engine, then we'll have the best of both worlds.
|
Yessss,
lets start with a fleet of dc3´s and ju52´s pressed into war service carrying cargo and troops. :-D |
Can you imagine an FSX like expansion, only with real FMs and DMs.
:lol: I'd love to see the look on a cattle car pilot's face when instead of a black screen, his 777 actually looses half a wing and spirals in trailing smoke and fire after he over stresses the airframe, then explodes into a million pieces. "Capt. CattleCar is turned into a heap of meat." Freaking hilarious. |
HA ha...the damage model was the one thing that I hated the most about MSFS...OK there are others!:-P
I'd love to see A2A "shockwave" get involved with 1C on SOW |
Thanks a lot for interview! Most important news is that project will not stop!
|
Quote:
Flyingbullseye |
Quote:
Did you find it? LOL I wanted an all out attack too. Even if it wasn't in the movie a DVD extra would be a great easter egg. The movies over 25 years old and I think it stands up pretty well considering. Maybe it's happened once in real life. We'd never really know it would we? ;) |
stunning information from oleg really ! somewhat odd we get to this information by accident almost, rather then it being a part of a scheduled update, but the last thing i want to do is voice any complaints right now :)
it confirms most of what i was hoping would be included in BoB, we're in for a treat folks ! and remember, in one of olegs recent interviews he indicated he was aiming for a 2009 release, so if all goes well we will get to fly it later this year :) |
With the broad appeal that they are looking for, it will be interesting to see if they keep the "Storm Of War" title for the series. They may have to tone that down abit, maybe something like "Storm Of Flight" to appeal to the masses, and peace niks:-P
|
Pffftttt....
Peaceniks won't even know about it. Too distracted by their iPods and broken down Volvos. |
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/newatta...0e9c04d01d64db |
Quote:
So do i, no really, u should check yourselfe in and send that stuff to me. Ill be more than happy helping u to a full and speedy recovery. No thx needed btw, thats just how warm and fuzzy i am, helping when ever i can :) |
Quote:
|
Sounds very good indeed. Thanks for the translation! Hopefully we'll be seeing some more of Oleg's new masterpiece soon.
|
@tanner
When i read all info i have the following facts: The developement of the engine is the most work! The ernestly work on SoW:BoB startet 2 Years ago! The completition at this time is at 60%, game-engine & features! That tells me that the missing 40% of features should take <12 months to develop. I think we really could soar the skies in 2009 with SoW:BoB |
My guess would be 95% of the game engine complete.
Over 60% of the features complete. Equals over 80% of the game finished. Adds up to a possible late 2009 completion baring mulitple super bugs. We should have a better idea this summer if they can complete by the end of this year. SOW is way to complicated for even the developers to know for sure. |
[QUOTE=nearmiss;
Oleg is on target. This IL2 raised my awareness for the first time about the Soviet airwar. Americans have been in information blackout on Russia and still are for the most part. I have bought up every Russian air war book I found for these past years.[/QUOTE] Great Update--Looking forward to the real deal, Thank you. I loved to build model planes as a kid. One of the models I really liked was the shark mouthed P-39. The Monogram model kit offered 2 ways to build the the P39 --the Russain version complete with decals (plus kill stars) and a US version. There was even a brief description of how the Russains used the P39. That was my introduction to the air war on the Eastern Front as a kid in the 1960's. I agree with the "awareness" comment but there has never been an information "blackout". The information has always been there but the Eastern Front was not pushed into the limelight. I remember mostly the Lend Lease program being taught in school to help England and Russia in the war effort. I think most countries naturally concentrate on that part of history which affected them the most. While most americans were probably not as familiar with the Eastern Front as they should of been it was probably the same for russains not being as familiar with a high altitude daylight strategic bombing campaign with 1000 bomber raids & high altitude fighter escorts on the Western Front;) The Western Front was a long range, high altitude, high speed aerial engagement. The Eastern Front was low to medium altitudes at mostly shorter ranges & moderate speeds. Both required different types of aircraft to fullfill mission parameters. There is also the "way" western aircraft were flown as both Brits & US aircraft were flown heavily overboosted utilizing 150grade aviation fuel resulting in these aircraft exceeding their factory specs in everday operations by 15-20%. So in my humble opinon I think it would be safe to say that all sides learned interesting historical facts thru IL2 about Russain, German, Italian, British, Japanese, & American aircraft. Also WWII history from all sides. - |
Quote:
Fortunately, RoF should help fill the gap for me. |
I think you are too pessimistic, both of you.
Neither Oleg, 1C, or whoever will publish the title in the West can afford to wait 2 more years. We'll see it by Christmas, this year. |
Thanks for the Tx....
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I said May/June '09 last October...Guess I'm out of the lottery. :\ Fact is no one knows when, but the pessimists are rife with predictions borne from the heretofor lack of tangible, measurable progress in a sim a large portion of the sim community have been very much looking forward to. |
Despite the joy I feel that we've finally heard something from Oleg I get this funny feeling that I'm not going to like the setting nor the circumstances under which we'll get the "new" add-ons for BoB. Isn't anyone out there who is actually freightened by the idea that companies like CaptainSim or A2A simulations would get involved? Oh sure, they do create great stuff, but their stuff costs also a great deal of money. Whereas we had Il-2 for at most 45 Euro's (top price in the Nehterlands), we wouldn't even get just one part of the CaptainSim product. B757 with all of it's blocks for a "discounted" price of 79.99 Euro's? It's a disgrace!!!
If that's the future of BoB then I'm really worried as many are not prepared to spend thousands of <your currency here> for having a "complete" sim. I'm also a bit worried about the "complete simulators" statement of Oleg whereas I feel that not all of the developers are quite as caring as Oleg is and obviously will rush products to the market... Having sat in the chair as an add-on developer (lead 3d designer of the DC-2 Uiver add-on) I know what it takes to deliver a great looking model. Three years to be exact. That's the time we've spent for this add-on to get it onto FS9 in order to support the real aircraft in the Aviodrome museum. That's not bound to be the time any developer would spend on an add-on which must be low-price or high content package. Just my two cents on the matter which seems not to be worrying anyone else. Regards, Alexander Александр |
You will have plenty of time to worry, if things really turn out the way you describe it. And even then, nobody is forced to use them.
But it is the future and considering how many free addons we had with IL2 compared to other games, it was pretty clear, that this was not going to be the same with the sequel. After all, Oleg and his team have to make money from it and the flightsim-market is one of the most wealthy games-markets out there (just look at how much money we spend on hardware, joysticks, even pits and panels!) |
Quote:
I'm not worrying about Oleg making money, I'm worrying about 3rd party developers who are abusing the scene with over the top prices. anyhow, if you read the interview and previous statements carefully then you'll notice that MSFS is being mentioned several times and that BoB add-on policy will be alike. In that case, if you want to have same on-line content as any other virpil then you actually are obliged to buy the same add-ons. Either that or people will get stuck with "off-line" content which becomes obviously obsolete after a certain amount of time as you can't use it on-line. A strategy of having a "mass" add-on like Pacific Fighters or 46 wit lots of aircraft of good quality is most favourable, but then again Company X would release that and Company Y would release something similiar with one or two bits different. Which one to get? Go figure! |
Just stick with Oleg's stock version, especially for online.
Simple. Remember that there will be locked Maddox approved servers that will only allow Olegs "mods", as it were. Seems easy to me anyway. |
Quote:
I do not think that you need to worry too much: - Oleg has stated long before this interview that there would be two categories of "additions": the ones officially sanctioned by MG which have vocation at being integrated in the "official" line; those ones would be distributed via Maddox Games as free or paying add-ons. This does not prevent commercial third parties to make such work, only that it will have to be distributed via MG if this work is to be used on-line. I am not in OM shoes but I would guess nothing prevents a commercial agreement between such third party and MG to get retributed on contract or on units sold. I suspect the pricing would be such as allowing all soW series owners a relatively easy access to these add-ons thus avoiding the situation you describe to a large degree. OM made very clear that he will keep a very close eye on fair online play! The second category of "additions" covers anything else: there you would find the equivalent of the IL2 MODs work but strictly limited to off-line use (or maybe private on-line play i.e. within a squadron for instance? I do not know). There again commercial third parties may be interested but here comes in the catch: - The development of an aircraft (and to a lesser degree other objects) is I believe more complicated in BoB-SoW than in FSx mainly due to the Damage Model and also to limitations in polynumbers (at least at this time; it does not mean that the engine will not support bigger numbers in the future, exactly like FSX does). The sophistication of the DM makes necessary to model the internal structure to a large extent (just look at the He-59...), which FSX does not need, and I can guess many operations like LOD, ghost parts, damaged part dynamic behaviour etc etc. I also suppose that the FM will be better written than the FS one but even then this will take quite a long time. On the other hand, no need of "commercial airliner"-type avionics complexities at least for the moment (as far as complexity is concerned, I mean! Vietnam-era jets were becoming to be items on this issue...) On all these points a commercial developer will need to be up to the MG level if he hopes to succeed in selling his wares...and he will have to compete for player's money with a solidly established line of MG add-ons, some of them free: this by itself should help into establishing a certain moderation in pricing, I think! But hey, it's only my two cents... JVM |
I think the most encouraging part of the entire interview was when Oleg said:
"Oh really? Have you seen better AI in any other sim? Generally, it was offline gameplay that drove most of our sales, and not the online modes." This tells me that he'll devote much needed attention to immersive and enjoyable offline content especially if he expects SoW:BOB to make any money. As for when it arrives - who knows but if it means making a great offline game, then he should take all the time he needs. |
I'm not worried yet. Off-line there is obviously nothing to worry about, and it would be a huge boost to the sim. Online it definitely would be more complicated depending on the security features.
If the aircraft is approved by the server and can be easily added to the server without everyone else having to buy the same aircraft it would be a big bonus. I'm not sure if it's possible, as those who hadn't bought that particular aircraft would need a nonflyable visual copy to see it in game. I personally don't care if one person on a server has a few extra flyable aircraft, if I don't want to fly those particular aircraft. I suppose it could work if the seller of that particular aircraft would have to provide a nonflyable visual version that could be downloaded from the server before flying on that particular server. |
Maybe Luthier will stop back and give us some insight on this matter. I'm sure that they have a well thought out plan for use of the third party content, without costing us a small fortune.
|
I wonder how many 3rd party developers are attempting to work with X Plane?
|
I like how you guys can workout that 60% complete means that it will be out this year, it means quite simply that there is 40% more work to do on it, it doesn't matter how you juggle the figures, if work started in 2007 (which i find very hard to believe because Oleg stated in Birmingham that he hoped for the game to be released in Q4 2007, was he on drugs?) its still got at least another year or so in development.
|
"A: Quality will not be affected. Timeline – we shall see. Right now we’re about 60% there, probably even more. [Luthier’s note: not 60% in terms of time, but 60% in terms of features.]"
That was what said in the interview. You read into this that the 60% still regards time? How? The remaining 40% of features could be the easy part and will not take as long time to do.. |
Well, I'm not really at ease but I think it's only natural. Having spent countless years in the MSFS community and 5 or so years in the Il-2 world I'm just voicing the concern that BoB add-on system has all the right parameters to venture onto the road called "making money like MSFS". Ofcourse I've read about the OM approved servers and stuff, but potentially we could end-up with "pure BoB" with fewer content we have right now for Il-2 for more or less the same price or going into the extreme where Oleg just approves add-ons from 3rd party with sky high prices just to make one extra buck...
Again, nothing wrong with making money and OM deserves that for all the hard work, but! But everything is wrong with making money like the developers around the MSFS franchise do. I'll give you an example: would you buy an add-on of a fully functional B-29 for Il-2 (if it would exist) for merely 80 dollars? Bright people would answer "no" just for the sake of it, but if you look deep down into your heart, lots of people would. The other lot which wouldn't buy this add-on could probably not fly on the OM pre-approved servers as the add-on is in the "official" OM line. How's that for a prospect? OM is making his well-deserved money and the users are stuck somewhere in the middle because it's pre-approved, but not really wanted by everyone other than the B-29 fanatics... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
That's not really just a possibility, but rather a likelihood. There's no way BoB can have anywhere close to IL2 (and it's already been said by Oleg, Luthier and others) that the initial release will only have 6 (I think that's correct) flyables and one main map. Comparatively, that's less than 1/10th of the content we already have in the IL2 series. Expecting anything more than that is simply wishful thinking. As long as the sim engine, FM's, DM's and effects are all they've been reported to be, I'll be quite satisfied. And will continue to fly IL2 for the stuff I can't get there. |
I have to agree that it is amusing to see some people saying that if 2 years work = 60% completed, 40% to be completed = <1year work! I hear logic like this concerning projects at work everyday! This is definately looking like a 2010 release.
Maybe this current version started work 2 years ago but we all know the initial version started before that. |
I'm not sure how people think that 60% of the features completed equals 60% of the total work done on this sim. That would be true if only 60% of all the other aspects of the sim were completed. ie game engine etc
No one ever said that BOB would have more planes and objects that IL-2. They said that the SOW series could end up with more aircraft, objects, and theaters than the IL-2 series. I get a kick out of people who say they won't buy SOW until their favortie a/c or theater arrives. What they don't understand is it may never arrive if BOB doesn't sell well. The developer stated that he hoped to have it done this year, so he can obviously see a scenarion where this can happen. Ofcourse he knows and we know that sh*t happens and it could be delayed indefinately. He has absolutely no reason to string us along as we will always be here flying Il-2 or ROF or whatever. Speculating that the sim will definitely be out this year or it can't possibly happen for another two years is all hogwash based on twisted facts. |
There are too many people who have lost the ability to dream :-D
|
Quote:
Good points raised there Chivas, but this same developer once said that he expected a release in Q4 2007, according to recent interviews the same developer is now saying work didn't start until 2007. No offence to Oleg but most of the hogwash is coming from his direction. Not that it really matters in the grand scale of things but there are some on here who have a selective memory. Oleg is God no question but he's not great with time scales and he certainly didn't build the world in 7 days, but try telling that to his followers. |
Quote:
Yes, I haven't seen mine for at least... two weeks. |
Quote:
|
Tree, I don't remember any Hogwash coming from the developer, he's never "promised" any release date.
Oleg first brought BOB to our attention back in 2004/5 with a "possible" release of end of 2005. At some point they realised the IL-2 engine wasn't capable of what they wanted to achieve with BOB and started the SOW engine build. At the same time the third party needed help to finish Pacific Fighters. This left a skeleton crew working on the SOW engine, objects, maps, and features. I don't remember the exact dates but about this time the publisher UBIsoft announced the release date of the end of 2006? This was never verified by the developer and UBI has never said a word since. From your investigation into the matter, they may no longer be the publisher. I don't know if they realized the SOW wasn't possible on 2007 computers, or there were still monies to be made with the IL-2 series, but they conscentrated their work on paid addons until the last addon IL-2 1946 was completed. So basicly the full development crew has only worked on SOW for the last couple of years, and the sales of the addons have helped finance full work on the SOW series. Again, anyone who has ever developed anything slightly complicated knows that its impossible to give a definite timetable. Oleg learned that lesson early in the IL-2 develpment and always tried to prefaced his comments with the word "hope". |
At the Birmingham interview Oleg said he expected a release in Q4 2007, but that's just history. The main thing is its still being worked on.
|
Quote:
|
I think that they doing their very best, and looking forward to a release as soon as possible...very complex, so much to do, most likely wishing the work load would end soon..and I bet very tired, but excited at what the world will soon see
|
Quote:
I also think that he said he WANTED the game out Q4 2007. The same way he said he wanted and needed it to be released Q4 2008. But things never turn out the way you plan them, especially not with such an unique project. |
With the statement that work on BoB started in 2007, I guess it will be fair to assume that these videoes from 2006 has very little to do with what we will be seeing in the end.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...42114309&hl=en http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...99853180&hl=en http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...44801294&hl=en But nevertheless, it seems to me like they had stuff like flightmodels, cockpits, dynamic weathersystems, squadron-size takeoff etc up and going allready in 2006. That's not bad for not even having really started working yet. In 2007, SaQSoN or Luthier (don't remember wich, and can not find the post) said that 1C could not afford NOT to release the game in 2008. Such a statement would normally indicate that the product in 2007 was in it final stage. If they had only started working in 2007, that's a little short funding for such a complex product. The thing that Oleg said in December that he hoped to have the SoW:BOB site up and running around the end of December is another weird mismatch between what he says and what we see. Most of all this wondering going on stems from Olegs own statements. And I really don't think he is trying to confuse us on purpose! No other game-developer has treated his customers as nicely as Oleg has done with the IL-2 series! So all these confuseing signals are making me really puzzled. Skarphol |
100% +1 , and here was me thinking i was the only one that had noticed.
|
up!
\,,/, |
Quote:
Well, that's where Oleg is in a lose-lose-lose situation. - If he says nothing about release-dates and estimations, especially in this forum SoW is declared as vapour-ware, Oleg is flamed for lack of information and threads demanding information fill the board. - If he posts his estimates, he "puzzles" people, because they take his estimates for dates written in stone and personal promises. But nobody ever did such a tremendous project, nobody had such variables as third-party modellers, texturers and researchers, as well as other dev-teams joining his own. - If he'd post a date he could surely hold, a LOT of people would get pretty p*ssed. Lets take the interview for example. He said that IL2 took 4 years to develop, SoW so far only 2 as a dedicated project and with the setting of making it a standalone game. Realistically considering the complexity of IL2 and SoW, a secure estimate would be 2011-2013. Who here would not be disappointed, if this was posted, even if Oleg knew it would be released much earlier than that? |
Why is it so hard to understand that a portion of the team has been working on BOB SOW starting probably before 2004. with large periods of that time taken up by work on IL-2 addons. Of course they would be things accomplished by a small team otherwise we wouldn't have seen any updates over the last 4 or 5 years. The fact remains the full development team didn't go full steam ahead until IL-2 1946 was completed.
You gotta stop looking at everything as Black and White. Life is mostly shades of grey. I'm not sure how much of their work was lost when they shifted to the SOW engine, as some of the early BOB updates may have been done on the old IL-2 engine. |
Quote:
|
Thanks for the translation, very nice to see Oleg shedding some much-needed light on this project! This however caught my attention:
Quote:
PS. Hiya guys, long time no see BTW. Still think the enemy has über planes and you p0rked? ;) ;) ;) |
Hi Feuerfalke and Chivas, I think you are very right about what you say in your post.
But what still makes me wonder is the lack of logic in what Oleg actually says. Like the thing with the SOW:BOB-site. If he at the beginning of December really thought the page would be up by end of December, then he has been greatly misinformed by the team that developes that site. Or (more possibly) someone at the publisher has stopped the launch of it. But obviously, Oleg was not informed aboout this in the beginning of December. And what about updates on this page? He says in october 2007: "I hope once per 2-3 weeks or so .... and more close to beta - each week like in old good time with IL-2" I think it is fair to say that his hopes has not come to fruitition. We may or may not be close to beta yet, (60% finished doesn't sound like beta to me) but he is obviously giving us far less information than he planned to, or hoped for. These, and other messages given during the years gives the impression that he doesn't have the control of the progress he should have. One thing is that creating a sim like this takes a whole lot of time (the timeconsumption is probably difficult to estimate), but Oleg seems to be at one stage of development one month, and then at a completely different stage the next month. As I said, I don't think he is trying to confuse on purpose, but to me this is really weird. And for release date; he hasn't given a hint for many years, so if he now says that he is 60% finished then that can be understood as a release around 2011. Time will tell. Skarphol |
Well the least thing we know now is that the project is not dead!
That´s happy news. |
Doing something creative is contradictory to having a definite timetable for it.
|
Quote:
If a restart was made in 2007, I'm gladly waiting until it's done... /Mazex |
(quote) Well, I get a strong feeling of some kind of a restart in 2007
This was my take as well...It seemed to me at the time, that the hack of IL-2 forced them to go back and re-write SOW, in a effort to close the way in. |
I really doubt online hacking was the reason for a possible restart, even though such a restart would make a lot of sense going by the huge confusion going on in the 1C information politics.
It's more likely the scope and projections of BOB were raised quite remarkeably with the realisation of the the online game market and the industry that was created around the Microsoft Flight Simulator series in developing third party content, one of the biggest points in the FS series success. I have little problem imagination that 1C wants to expand upon these expiriences and offer a broadband product suitable for all kinda tasks, in which BoB, like Crysis for Crytek, is more or a less a "very good" tech demo for promotion. That does not nessecarily make it a bad game, but from what I read about the egnines and games refinment with the engine the BoB scenario would be a complete waste, with possible further theater expansions taken into account. With other words, I think BoB will become much more of a 21th century product with all the features and possiblities in professional gaming for a wide audience instead of an old fashioned straight to the point flight simulation as was IL2 the last real incarnation of. As with all the other points, purely speculative however. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I don't see what logic is refering to with the statements you posted? People demand something and Oleg gives the best guess he can offer given the momentary status and going of the project. That has nothing to do with logic, continuity, wisdom or lack of project management. That is called life, you know, the thing what happens to you while you are busy making other plans Besides that, the "60%"-thing is a great example of how even an actual statement based on facts is turned into rubbish and estimates again. 60% of work done does not equal 60% of the project done or 60% of the time used, the project needs to be finished. So, you obviously can understand everything the way you want it: Guesses as facts, facts as guesses. Taking your initial point about Olegs logic: What is the readers logic in interpreting so many facts in so little statements? Just wait and see. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:38 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.