oleg, you better hurry, RoF is releasing a ww-2 sim next
 

there is many things wrong with RoF (mostly because they are starting to sell it before many of the problems with it are resolved, and it has a very cumbersome and inconvenient online-only play mode), but i just noticed a few comments in the last weeks from its staff that they are planning to release a ww-2 sim next, and that they will do this "soon" (not in a few years, could be as soon as a few months)

right now they sell a game with 2 flyable aircraft only as a ww-1 flightsim, and they have completed the work on their scenery and grafix engine. to now create two ww-2 flyable planes and slightly change their scenery to suit the battle of brittain era would take them very little effort imo.

they also provided some degree of openness in their game environment where they want to get their customers involved in creating game objects and addon planes and scenery

oleg, you might want to consider releasing BoB sooner then later imo. RoF looks very good (probably not as good as BoB will be, but close ?), and if to many flightsimmers get distracted by it this could well take some of your customers away

your loyal supporters know you are working on a grand masterpiece that will set new standards in flightsim performance and features, but there is only a limited number of aviation fans out there as a customer base. the sooner you can releases your sim, the more wind you will be able to take out of their sails :)

This has got to be the funniest post I've seen in a long time. Very nice, zapatista! Hope to see more funny stuff from you.

Aviar

ROF does look very good, but still needs alot of work before they could ever release a WW2 map and aircraft. In other words there is no chance the ROF developers could release another flight sim in the next months or even years for that matter.

+1

I'm glad to see I'm not the only person who thinks this post is hilarious. :D

S~ Aviar

B

Don't get me wrong, I am ordering it, but seriously to think they could bring out another sim, hell they still have not finish this one yet.
My understanding is at present ten planes maximium multiplayer or the lag kills you...

"Soon"(?)...that is funny.

:mrgreen:

initial post isnt funny at all...ROF is the most realistic sim up to date....yes, it is full of bugs and with only a few planes....just like IL2 was back then in 2002 hehe
I wonder how a hardcore simmer could possibly hate any of the great titles in sim genre (or makers)....red baron 3d, IL2, lockon, ROF...etc.

pffft from my ass in your mouth

did you earn your beta tester status and made ur loyality showroom for SOW?

thats what i thought to

but when in the last weeks i did more background reading on what the RoF creators themselves actually said, about their current game, their sales model, and the way they plan to go forward, i got a different perspective on what they are doing

look at it this way, would anybody here really consider buying a full price aviation sim with only 2 flyable planes that are not even historically matched as opponents in the sky, one small map, only daytime weather, static cloud displays and static weather patterns, an empty in game world with only the odd token few trucks or tanks in one spot as mission objectives, "famed" flight modeling that produces takeoff and landing distances 4x longer then real life, only summer season for all maps, etc.... add to that you need to be 24/7 online to even play offline single missions, no real dynamic campaign, only 5 against 5 online servers where you have to wait your turn to rejoin a game after getting killed, no coop servers, no campain servers..........need i go on further ? :)

the obvious answer is no, we wouldnt.

but that is exactly what they are selling right now at the price of a normal full game

and here is the kicker, to get more maps, more planes, more objects, more seasons, you will have to pay for each item.

then i saw several specific posts from several RoF employees themselves, and this indicated that the missing content in the current game is very deliberate and could have been included from the start, for ex most of their main addon planes for RoF are already finished and they will put them for sale in a gradual manner to keep generating income, and here is the surprising part, that their next project is already started and will focus on ww-2

the main problem i see is that RoF really lowers the standard of what we expect from a decent flightsim, however good it looks and might fly. add to that a limited customer base for flight sims in general, and it can reduce the rapidity that olegs new product can penetrate the market. we have been incredibly lucky with oleg's products in the last years it seems, and if this RoF crap is going to be considered normal in the new future as a game, we'r all in trouble as flightsimmers.

they dont plan to "finish it", they simply will make the missing items in it for sale as addons, expansions and features

the problem is that an unfinished product like that being sold to enough silly people willing to buy it can now be seen by RoF as validation that this sale model works, and that people are prepared to pay full price for that little content

me mentioning they are now already working on a ww2 sim based on the same "game concept" is not idle speculation i grabbed out of the air, i saw this from indications in post from some of their own programmers and designers in other forums

Was not going to take a dig at another sim but, I will anyway.
I remember many months ago having a discussion on OFF about the pricing of their Phase 3.
I was lambasted because I told them the market would not support the high $50 price tag plus shipping. Well it is now selling for a more realistic to quote their site - NEW SPECIAL OFFER - OFF @ $29.99 (+p&p and taxes) see BUY page - Back on topic ROF is bright and shiny and new. But interest is already starting to disipate as reports of problems filter in.
The reason IL2 stood the test of time is because it was a basically sound product from the word go. Yes many patches later it is the near perfection we see today.
Unfortunately ROF is not a sound product. Why would I pay to fly a Fokker DR1 if I am already an ACE in an Albatros. Why would I pay to have winter landscape?
I would pay if the overall game worked, and I was dragged into the world through immersion. Yes buy the game I will, but I doubt I will be buying any add on planes until they offer something concrete in the way of dynamic campaign and better online play.
Unfortunately for them I am the same guy who would buy their WW2 sim. So if I am let down by ROF they cannot realistically expect me to buy their WW2 sim.

One thing I can say about Oleg, his sims have never let me down, even Il2 version one, you know the one, the one that had no flyable Stuka.
Hours of training just to learn how to land a plane properly. Who had ever heard of such a thing.

ROF hasn't even scratched the surface of flyable and AI aircraft they need to realistically depict their own "1917" subtitle. If they choose to ignore the scanty planeset and press for a totally new release they'll end up in obscurity - forgotten, ignored and scarcely lamented.

Not as long as 1C is still in the picture.. I don't think that 1C will allow the standards to drop but so low... and they will certainly raise them higher than they are now.... I have not gotten RoF.. even the demo.... I cant speak for anyone else.. but for me the prospect of a limited theater, limited planeset sim with limited online capabilities, by an unproven developer is not a threat to 1C at this point... I think any real simmer is just filling a void until SoW is released.. and once it is released I have little doubt it will do what 1C sims have been doing for almost the last 10 years..

Not only that... I for one am not crazy about the idea of paying peicemeal for things that should be in a sim IMO. 1C has raised the bar... any real contenders will have to meet it or go home.

Hmmm. Mixed feelings about Rise of flight at the moment. I was initially very enthusiastic about the sim, having much interest in that era......But recent things coming to light are making me think again. The AI looks incredibly unresponsive when under attack judging from a lot of YT vids I have watched, sometimes it looks like it has taken them an eon to realise they are under fire. The also seem to suffer from the "gang bang" mentality on the friendly side, ala at times IL-2, with 2-3 friendly AI getting in the way of player shots, and seemingly recklessly risking collision with you. Maybe this is harsh, and I do not know how configurable AI difficulty settings are.....Its possible that the makers of these vids had them on "lower" settings, I would hope, as they are just getting used to a new sim.

Now I'm no Physics "Major", but as impressive as some of the effects look, some of them do not look quite right to me. A plane diving at a collosal speed regardless of its weight is going to build up a lot of mass and energy, right? It just seems sometimes that they just crumple like the paper aeroplanes I used to throw at my maths teacher as a kid, when they were'nt looking :) Maybe I am wrong about this, but I would expect for example them to be impaled into the ground in this scenario, if coming down at speed at a 90 degree angle. Like I say, maybe due to their relatively light weight this would be correct, someone please correct me if this is so.

RE the paying for add ons scenario, I understand the POV that more should be included in the original release, but consider this. Haven't we as simmers been perhaps "spoiled" over the years with free addons, particularly from Oleg and Co? Lets make no mistake, they are in this to make money, and more accurately HAVE to make money, or they will go under like so many before them. A flight sim company succeeding is good news for all of us I believe, because this genre is small enough and arguably endangered as it is.

I guess I fall into the "wait and see" box, I will keep tabs on user opinions as to be honest I don't really know enough about it as of yet. I'll play the demo when it is released, and take it from there.

Like Fox Mulder, I WANT TO BELIEVE, lol.....But by nature have always been a bit of a doubting Thomas :)

Coming soon! :)

http://i40.tinypic.com/34t4z1h.jpg

It will be interesting to see where ROF is in a year and half's time when SOW gets released, maybe it will have escalated by then and be a much bigger sim. At the moment it does not interest me that much.

Especially when half the flyable aircraft hadn't even been introduced into service by the end of that year!

"The D.VII entered squadron service with Jasta 10 in early May 1918." Anyone can find out that information by googling Fokker DVII - but the RoF guys tend to ignore history it seems.

Now, I've read some RoF fans saying that historical context isn't important (@simhq) but I think that's a derisory excuse for such an anachronism. I've always had a love for WW1 aviation: Mickey Mannock and Albert Ball were my father's boyhood heroes and I caught it off him. I would love to take part in a WW1 sim, but nothing about RoF inspires me to buy it.

Brando

Your right that the ROF developers are thinking of going into the WW2 flight sim market, but that in no way puts any pressure on the SOW developers. What I've seen from ROF is very good but no where near the detail the SOW developers are trying to achieve. Not that the ROF developers can't reach that level of detail, but I believe they are atleast a three years behind the development position of SOW.

I believe the ROF sim will progress nicely over the years of paid and/or unpaid addons. That's if initial sales are good enough for them to continue the project. I also don't have a problem with paying for the added material.

Developing these sims is a very expensive and time consuming project. Releasing an early addition of the sim provides the developer with some much need cash. It lets them know if there is enough interest by the flight sim community to continue the years of labour.

Lets face it 39 bucks is nothing and paying a few bucks more for each aircraft or two combined other improvements to the sim is also very very cheap. I know Oleg doesn't see this as a route he wants to follow, but basicly hes doing the same thing. Hes just providing more content, for more money, at longer intervals. While ROF is providing less content, for less money, at shorter intervals.

Shorter intervals are not a bad idea as you know how little patience some in the flight sim community have. ;)

+1. We can complain about Il2 defects or omissions, but after a quick reality check with the competitors' products we go back to father Oleg as a bunch of prodigal sons.

Regards,
Insuber

The problem is ............ we have been spoilt by Oleg & 1c in the past with free updates, aircraft, maps and ground objects.

The Author of IL2 has surpassed any other genre of flight sim support wise and I hope it continues.

As for Rise of Flight........... I loose interest half way through saying its title.

Can't believe the amount of false rumors and crap information I read in this thread....

Neoqb has no intention to developp a WWII sim in the near future (in the next years).
The actual map isn't small by any standard, and took more than 2.5 years to developp, and building the planes and objects took a lot of time also.
Neoqb is now working hard to developp new planes and new features for their game.

AND... There's absolutly NO competition between ROF and SOW:BOB. Most of RoF purchaser will, lile myself, buy SoW:BOB as soon it will be released.

Good Job Zapatista, trying to build a useless "sim fight" on lies and mean false rumors!!!!

He's been doing these anti RoF threads and posts before it's nothing new. I mean comon seriously what the hell do you want? a fight were everyone just hates RoF just because you don't like it?, truth to be told i think you hate it because you know it's good and you're such a fanboy of Olegs work which you haven't even seen in MOTION YET. (2006 videos in all glory but they ain't anything spectacular today 3 years later)

Seriously i see nothing but RoF bashing in the initial post. RoF will sell and it does sell , who the **** gives a crap about your opinion man it's not like somebody ain't gonna buy it because of your posts. I must admit it's rather funny seeing that you seem to have made it your task of life to inform everyone how bad RoF is without even testing it yourself. The developers of RoF ain't out to fool around with anyone and people who accept their business model will buy it just as people play WoW or anything else. (WoW is played by over 12 million still it's probably hated by twice as much)

Sick of the 2 plane whine argument, it never gets old does it? How cheap are you?. Did you ever play the initial IL2 at all... the game wasn't what it is today it was loaded with bugs and you didn't have 100s of aircrafts. Another famous game was loaded with bugs it was called OFP 1 and Armed Assault both indeed very popular and solid games after a few patches, sold very well. RoF isn't even that buggy it has it's issues but it's defiantly a solid and playable release.

I have no problem with 2 fly ables , I've no problem with buying small updates at a small price, seriously not everyone thinks like you, accept it. Anyway it's a myth that you'll have to pay for landscape and such. In RoF the engine updates will be free and content such as extra planes will cost a few bucks.

Chevas said it very nice with the comparison more or less oleg is doing the same but with larger updates at a larger price.

You are right...and by the looks of things (even with our infrequent up-dates have been) Oleg is planning on giving us value for our dollar in the future. We know he has been working on 3rd party development tools...this in itself suggests a vibrant modding community. The ROF people will have to work pretty hard to equal the work (& options) Oleg has been talking about.

Well, I've already pre-ordered--more as a curiosity. There is not a chance that I would ignore Oleg's work as a result. I just think WW1 is somewhat neglected, and I just wanted to support it this go-around. But, to be honest, I hadn't given much thought to the bait-and-switch game RoF is playing on us. I don't want to be ANYONE's perpetual income unless they want to earn every cent, every time. Looks like I bought "potential" this time. I just might cancel the pre-order.

i dont think it would be bad if that concept was true, but it isnt the case here. you could for ex sell RoF initialy at 20$ as it is now in its unfinished late beta stage, then ask 5$ for each extra plane that might be released at one per month, and ask 10$ for the combined winter, autum, spring version of the current maps, and add a few more interesting new map sceneries at the same time for (right now it is a monotonous flat single map landscape that looks the same from one end to the other and you are stuck with permanent daytime summer weather, err they didnt even model night or dawn or dusk)

the problem however is that they ask full price for the hollow shell it is now, and you will pay more like 25$ for each next plane you have to buy (the 2 included planes right now are not competitively matched for online competition)

have a look at these prices from the RoF officially recommended sales point in north america (http://www.fspilotshop.com/index.php...a5cd2c1a262cc3)

as you can see it is full price, same bracket as all the other real sims that are a finished product and completed game (fs-X, black shark, x-plane, etc....)

now the point i made in the OP, is that if you put some of these normal sims on the shelf at walmart next to RoF, and you have only a limited number of people shopping there for flightsims, the people who unknowingly buy RoF without being aware of all its limitations and lacking features could reduce the customer base for other genuine complete product flightsims (since the uninformed customer on the surface cant differentiate between what features and elements a real comprehensive flightsim product has normally, and the boxes will all look very similar), and if they make enough sales to make this sales tactic profitable other game creators could also shift to the same tactic, in which case we are all in serious trouble

regarding a quick follow up release now from RoF with a ww-2 sim based on the same sales model, a good analogy is pioneer discontinuing the manufacturing of its high end plasma tv's last year after on an annual basis being the clear winner in best quality products for large flatscreen displays, because however much better they were then the rest of the flat screen tv's of the same sizes (be it lcd or plasma from other brands), the 30% premium in price they had to ask was cutting out a large part of their sales volume, and most customers just ware not critical enough to make an informed choice, and bought on price alone. similarly, if RoF ww-2 sim is released 6 or 9 months before oleg's BoB, it WILL cut into oleg's sales imo, however bad RoF-ww2 is going to be from our more informed perspective.

poor rama, you really have trouble understanding the world, dont you

there you are clearly wrong again, you dont know your facts. but as usually with you, dont let that stop you, just be rude and aggressive enough and pretend you know everything, that should be about enough for your level of logic

if they only have a few people working for them, then the length of time it takes has little to do with an indication of the finished product. as a single map they provide, it is a very monotonous scenery that is essentially the same all throughout the map. simple put you can just make one small section, then multiply it with little difficulty and quickly make it larger with a few minor changes. there are no mountains, no different countries with different trees and foliage, no deserts, islands, etc... or didnt you spot any of that ?

you poor thing, you really think people come here just to deliberately hassle you ? do you also think the whole universe spins around you maybe ? o what a troubled life you lead !

i'll try and help you out a little so you find these forums less confusing, read OP text, make sure you read what they actually wrote, and dont substitute your own confusion

Hi zapatista. Was wondering where you found this information out, or is it something you are taking a wild guess at?

"the problem however is that they ask full price for the hollow shell it is now, and you will pay more like 25$ for each next plane you have to buy"

Could you show me where neoqb have stated or quoted this price please? I find it hard to believe they will be charging this much for one add on aircraft, but if you can show me otherwise then please do.

Thanks.

ROF a threat? A threat to what?

Those little slow planes with the rat-a-tat-tat-tat machine guns looping around like flys in the sky. It is an Online game only as well.

No threat... That sim can't keep the interest of an 11 year old for long.

Whereas you can put an 11 year olds in front of a computer playing IL2 1946 version 4.08 and they'll play it for weeks. I've done that. The funny part is the 11 year olds found items of interest in the sim that just kept them coming back for more. Folding the wings on takeoff, flying in the different gunner positions, wingtip smoke with video replays, flying AI and just watching the whole battle unfold.

It was amusing to see all the things they could find to do with it and just love it.

A true fanboy speaking , is this some kinda cult or something.. I mean you do make it sound like IL2 is your religion jeez? Ah yeh forgot i am at the 1c forums where all the locked up fanboys live. Wanna join me in the sun some or is it too bright. Seriously go outside and enjoy life ?

No?
ok let's bash RoF some more then seeing as you're still waiting and waiting and have nothing better to do but bash products that doesn't suit your 1980s offline module or the so called perfectionism of BoB .. "the game we haven't even seen in motion yet, and updates every 6th months"

Still dont wanna go outside?
no?

Ok let's worship Il2 some more and make up the most idiotic stories ever heard.

How about that 11 year kids story? I think I've never heard a more desperate approach in trying to make something look stupid, i think theres enough examples in IL2 alone where people leave b4 they even get up in the air, not because its a bad product but because they ain't flight simmers or they just hate ww2.. or simply they didn't like the game. (Oh yeh everyone loves it? In your world maybe.. take a look outside the 1c/ubi boards sometime for the love of god, you'd be making both you and me a favor)

On a seriously level, i don't really understand why people here are so desperate to look down on RoF and keep promoting IL2 and BoB, it's not like ROF is trying to compete with either of them. Just accept the fact that another flight simulator is establishing itself at this very small market and be grateful for the people it brings into the genre.

Anyway here is why i bought em both , similar reasons..

My reasons for buying IL2 Series Was:
- Graphics
- Physics
- WW2
- Multiplayer

My Reasons for buying RoF series Is:
- Graphics
- Physics
- Aerodynamics
- WW1
- Multiplayer

No game is perfect.

I like the tone of your article, its got just the right tone in sarcasim...
But back on topic here, I have nothing against ROF. Neither their flight model or financial model. I do however have an issue with what they are offering for the price. If they are going to sell add-in's then the base product should be a lot cheaper for what you get. If you read their early blogs they promised a lot including a movie builder, persistant universe. As far as I have seen the game has shipped without a lot of these key components. I also fly for an online squadron and looked forward to ROF, but co-op, massive online maps just are not there.
I have seen screenshots of weather effects so I am assuming posters that say you only get bright sunny days are wrong, but then with so much else missing from what was promised one has to ask will we have to pay for the weather too?
Just pulling your leg on that one, frankly I will judge the rest when I fly it which I hope is in the next week or two.

Much less than YOU have...

I don't know everything, but since I worked with Gennadish, then neoqb as benevolent helper since almost the start of the devlopment of this sim, I know a little bit more than you do about it.

You don't know what you're talking about.... the map is large, have you flown above it from one end to the other???
No... you're just assuming (wrongly) and presenting it lile the "truth", it's a typical volontary twist of the reality, and the clear show of mean intentions.

The map use an accurate elevation model over the whole area, and was developped using topomaps from 1900 (that I provided to the dev), who spent a lot of time digitizing the road network, the railways network, etc... with accurate positions.
That's the way neoqb works for every part of the sim... there's absolutly no way they will quickly and cheaply do a WWII sim or whatever fantasm coming directly from your twisted imagination.
You're only spreading false rumors with bad intentions... you're a lier and a Troll.
... and everybody will know it when they will be able to try the demo.

As usual, you're talking about yourself... ;)

IMHO ....Wasn't Zapatista one of the alias's used by the infamous Sgt Slaughter? I think I recall that name from the list that was posted over at Hyperlobby....

I think some of you are going over board on this...we don't need another zoo here

This is the IL2 forums, what do you expect?

SimHQ has a bunch different flight sims in their forums. You can share your joy of ROF there with like minded people. If you go to the iL2 boards there you'll probably get some more of the noise you don't want to hear.

I don't know anyone who has paid $45 for RoF.

I know I didn't, and I got free shipping as well.

Some of you guys need to get a life.

Really.

Ha-Ha-Ha... too late. These days I find the "zoo" to be a bit more interesting. ;)



By the way, a more effective price-point for add-on aeroplanes would be $4.99, not $5.

zapatista

ROF will be the next benchmark combat flight sim and at 39 bucks plus a few dollars for updates, its a steal. I'm sure I payed atleast 70 dollars Canadian for the first addition of IL-2 and it totalled alot more when you added all the later additions of the series. What we pay for Combat flight sims software is like stealing in my opinion.

SOW will be the new benchmark combat flight sim when its released in a year or two. ROF will go thru many years of updates before they can even think about building a WW2 sim on the ROF engine.

I'm sure the SOW developers are having considerable headaches putting
all the detailed terrain, hundreds of aircraft, advanced Weather Systems, FM's, DM's, and AI with playable frame rates. SOW could have been released a couple of years ago if they wanted the detail that ROF provides, but they are working on something they hope to be more advanced and cinematic.

ROF will do well to stick with WW1 combat flight sims for awhile until they refine their new ROF engine. They certainly seem to have the drive and talent to be a player in the combat flight sim genre for years to come. I know I'm looking forward to buying their products.

My thoughts exactly. At least for my personal taste, there's too many restrictions and an awful lot of things lacking to justify a full-game price. I'll get the demo when its released and see if the experience is good enough to warrant a purchase at its current half-finished state, otherwise i'll just wait for a few months until prices drop.

The original IL2 was limited and had its issues, just like RoF or any other new title for that matter. However, let's make an important distinction here that most people seem to miss or conveniently "forget". IL2 had most of what you needed to recreate the theater of war in question. RoF doesn't really have it.

Maybe we didn't have a flyable Stuka in the original IL2, but we still had an AI Stuka. RoF however doesn't have an AI Pfalz or AI Sopwith Pup/Camel and Se5a. It's not so much that it lacks flyables, it lacks AI aircraft too, important ones that had a big impact during the targeted timeframe.

It's a matter of branding and delivering what the title says. There are flight sims and there are combat flight sims. When i get a combat flight sim that has a "1917" subtitle, i expect to see the 1917 air war, not two flyable planes and half a dozen AI ones that make up a small percentage of the total. If you can't recreate the theater in question in an adequate manner, it's not a combat flight sim anymore, but a flight sim of an airshow with a handful of WWI planes.

No amount of FM/DM perfection or eye candy can change that, so until they add at least some more AI aircraft i will say it's incomplete. Of course, that's my personal opinion and others are free to judge differently and buy it. It's ok with me really as both sides will be happy in the end. They will get more hours of flying RoF and i will get a finished product thanks to them financing and beta testing it through its baby steps. ;)

When you'll buy RoF - you'll see many nice things in comparson to Il-2. This will be the first impression.
However in many items it is still far away even from Il-2.
Really I don't afraid if they will do WWII era aircraft. They need couple of years hard work if not more just to catch or reach our level in BoB at all in all items. Alos they have some limits for modeling of WWII eara aircraft in their engine and they soon will understand it themselves..

Read my interview on SimHq about our goal and my and Ilya opinion about situation on the Flight Sim market.

Also... I never promise or advertize things, that didn't went in final production... in comparison to some other developers.

We will go by other business model with SoW. I would be too hard with more complex in development and time consuming to go with so many free updates with aircraft and other objects. However we will keep some part as free updates with new content and of course fixes if neccessary. But general line - partially open architecture of the sim that to get all these third party developers to work officially, but not modding with stolen(hacked) source code.

Probably we also will sell some additions. But general line of all Sow series - second sim we may play stand alone or install in the first one. Then the third sim play alone, or install in the merged already first + second sim in a series, etc...
By this way we will build again the flight sim of all times... :) Like a collection of WWII and some other near than time eras (from us. From third party commersial of free addons we may see WWI or 2025 year aircraft or even complete sims. From third party in time we may see controlable u-boats and ships, tanks or sport cars on a track...)

At least I hope and no one hard point never stop me before I release my thoughts in software (almost would say in metal...)

thanks for taking a moment to reply to my observation that RoF is intending to release a ww-2 sim next.

i saw a statement on this from one of the RoF creators in another flightsim forum, and i didnt know if you we aware of it. it is always good to know if there are competing products in the making.

It sure doesn't sound like Oleg is too worried, judging by the quotes in that interview. He says the RoF developers "...need couple of years hard work if not more just to catch or reach our level in BoB at all in all items."

Then he says that the RoF gaming engine "...have some limits for modeling of WWII eara aircraft...".

I don't think Oleg has lost one second of sleep over it.

Aviar

Well, that's very close to the truth lol!

*waves flag with black shark on it*

There's a couple of great sims out at the moment, I think we're very fortunate. 1C would appear to be the benchmark now, but I don't think we can dismiss others as filler.

And as has been said earlier, flight sims just get harder and more expensive to produce as time goes by, and sell to fewer people. I wish we wouldn't whine so hard, when the alternative is considered.

(quote)Oleg Maddox
From third party in time we may see controlable u-boats and ships, tanks


Oleg do you think it possible someday for a total land, sea, and air on-line simulated war useing SOW engine. With the introduction of drivables, be it land and sea it seems possible to me:-P

Right said :)

Well, good to hear from the Gaffer again. I think most know that 1C are top dog in this field, and I have no doubt they will prove it again with SOW. Now get back to work lads, and stop dilly dallying!! Hehehe :grin:

Looking forward to updates again hopefully in Sept, keep up the good work ;)

It will depends of how much we will be able to insert in the initial release and its success on the market.
If it will go with success then we will be free to add more and more features to help third party to release their dreams.

With the release it will be ready for third party modeling of aircraft, ground objects (both static and AI), online maps, controlable by player guns. But our external special tools for inserting of these objects will be ready a bit later than the release of the sim itself. It will be separate tools for free downloading and use.

I think it is possible to get flight sim as a flight sim, where we have aircraft as main heroes with simplified model of control for tanks, cars, torpedo boats of drednauts. I don't think we are going for modeling of all the personel positions of drednauts...:)
Simplified controls of these ground objects need to be present due to standards of other games that to invite in our niche more non-fligth simmers.

I think the next code that we will release with the tools should be drive-able tanks, cars(with ability to dive and shoot from MG of this military car) and torpedo boats.

Am I right?

PS. Also... there is real complex tasks that to make all this alive and with superb playablity... We will need also to give user of tank(ship) to command other AI tanks (ships) :) and these commands are not the same type as we a doing for the aircraft AI :)

Yes. be sure ;)

Oleg, it's great to see you replying to posts here :)

Since you seem to be online right now, I'd like to use this opportunity to suggest a new feature in BOB. Please have a look at the image below.

http://img264.imageshack.us/img264/9428/convcg8.jpg
(Image hosted by ImageShack.us)

What I'm suggesting here is a guns test map where we can do the thing shown in that picture.

The most important thing we do in such a map is to test where the bullets will hit on the "blackboard" which is at a chosen distance from the fighter: the "blackboard" can be placed at different distances from the stationary fighter, and we can certainly set different convergences for the cannons for testing.

Of course, when we have set the convergence for an aircraft's cannons, we know exactly the point where the cannon shells will meet, theoretically, and their paths in the horizontal plane. But we the sim pilots do NOT know the shells' trajectories in the VERTICAL PLANE.

[But we may not do exactly the same thing as did they in the photo. They were possibly also adjusting manually the elevation values of the gun barrels to make them match the convergence (bullets reach the pilot's sighting line at the convergence point). We perhaps do not need to do the same thing with elevation values because every gun's elevation value and its convergence are automatically matched in game (as in IL-2) when you set the gun's convergence.]

So if such a map exists, then the sim pilots will know much more about the bullets' behaviour in the vertical, by placing that "blackboard" at different distances from the stationary fighter. Such knowledge is very much valuable to one's gunnery.


`
PS: Sorry this post is not related to the topic:).

About RoF engine - all is my thoughts after playing it around 4 hours that to look all things that they did there from professional point of view. I may be wrong in some details of my opinion, but in general I think I'm right.
I may say what I like there and it would be not in comparion to Il-2 or BoB... just what I like.
I like FM - for the first time in non jet sim I see good things. But it is good untill we get damage of aircraft. Looks nice, but in some cases - non realistic. Probably they will correct it in time. We also had in Il-2 some bugs in that area in the beginning untill we did all stable and working as it should with all cross functions tuned. However we had way more in amount that to tune...
I like details of aircraft (but the lighting effects is overdone on some surfaces).
I like Hangar in menu
I like the check by internet keys. However I will not go by the same way. Should be found more optimal.
I like the simulation of physics

Probably that is all.

What I dislike - I will never tell :) Users will find it themselves in time. Of will not find... and will be happy for one more other sim on the market.

Rumors that they developing WWII era aircraft - in my opion it is their mistake. For this they will need:
- to make also all enviroument of WWII era from arifield equipment to tanks, cars, etc...
- AI Radio chatter, engine for Radio chatter and its recording in sound, ability of player to interact with AI (great task really)
- to make at least night working in 3D engine and to make AI changes in that item....

Just of these main things listed above they will need really great development time, even if it was started a year or so earlier before release of RoF... If there will be just several playble aircraft - you can't name it combat sim... Interests will be little. Say like for some of add-ons for MS FS.
And I listed just some part of what they will need for WWII era success title...

In my opinion they should at first:
- fix bugs
- give more features of WWI era... It would be more easy for them really and will help to sell way more than it will be really....
- expand theater from beginnind of WWI to Russian October Revolution and the civil war in Russia (there were say English pilots on the north of Russia, White army pilots, Red army plots.... At least it would be very interesting for Russin customers... This is almost unknown for wide range of public in the west and east...)
- to make way better single and of course - online gameplay.

For WWI isn't so neccessary to make full copy of original cockpit for each aircraft (also they are way more simply in modeling and programming), because for many cockpits there are simply no one useful reference... in comparison to WWII and up - the consuming time for development of each aircraft is way greater... (and with our level of precise in SoW.... would be too hard for them to make more precise if only possible :))

We did such devices(test targets) already.
However I'm not sure that we will use it for direct purpose. Becasue of time limitation. Also it isn't very useful for many types of aircraft that to make it looking realistic... and it will be not so useful for the beginners...
So probably we will have it as static objects on some airfields.

Its like listening to an artist talk about someone else work...Oleg only comments on the good things. ;)

Thank you for your reply:grin:! Very glad to hear that your team have made somthing similar.:-) At least it can be hoped that the test map will be seen in one of BOB's expansion packs.

I agree, haha. But I'm not sure what you mean by the following sentence. Could you add a few more words to it?

@Proton.... I think its called common decency :) Cheers for sharing your thoughts on this Oleg, I mentioned my concerns about damage modelling earlier in this thread and asked for other opinions but nobody replied, glad to hear that at least someone agrees! But like you say, its not something that cannot be fixed.

All RoF comments aside (though they ARE appreciated), it's nice to see you take a few moments to post your thoughts here Oleg.

It's exciting to read the level of detail and complexity being built into SoW including a possible basic ground-handling model for other vehicles. Obviously, my greatest desire is to have great flight models, detailed damage models, a powerful mission builder and an easy multiplayer capability. Those are the things most important to me.

The complete environment is usually underrated by many (myself included) and having the added detail in the ground objects really is important to create an overall "feel" and add immersion.

Again, thanks for taking the time to post some of your thoughts.


TB

This means that for each aircraft we need to make special holders, visual and program.
Big work really. And then bug problems for third party.... and later with each addition of new aircraft type or model we need to make separate code and new holder in 3D for just this purpose. Way too expencive just ofr the nice feature.

Ground modeling is importnat for all modes of gameplay in flight sim. From single to online. Ground targets define the ouput of online wars, etc... Its targets for bombers.
In one of modes of BoB online ground objects will define all the ways of gamplay.

So I guess (campaign wise) for a RAF pilot, a high kill rate Vs fighters will mean nothing if the bombers get through to their target. Or the same for a Axis fighter pilot if the bombers fail to damage their objectives.

Will campaign success be based on what percentage of a target is protected or destroyed?

Cheers! Oh and thank you for the countlesss hours of enjoyment and frustration I have experienced in IL-2. I am looking forward for even more in BoB!

I truly wish more people would follow his example. Seems in these times it's mostly the other way around...

@Oleg:
After all the infantry-based games that want to be vehicle- and flight-simulations (like ArmA or BF2) and fail utterly, it's a great idea to have a flightsim giving players the chance to use ground-vehicles.

Another revolutionary idea, though it was truly overdue!

(quote)Oleg Maddox
Am I right?


Have you ever been wrong?:grin:...not offen I think

Oleg,

it is exciting to see many of those aspects are coming true, many of us have dreamed of some sorts of integration of a flightsim with ships, submarines, and ground vehicles like tanks :)

will we be able to walk/run with our player pilot ? for ex from aircraft to AA gun, from briefing hut to aircraft, and from crashed aircraft to nearby vehicle for example ? if not immediately available, is that type of "real world" interaction going to be possible for the BoB players at some point ?

thanks again for your recent answers, its great to get some further detail :)

:)
Thanks for the reply Oleg. Whatever ROF turns out to be we're all still hoping BoB gets here soon.
Best of luck and good hunting
AP:-)

so, you need to compare il2 demo with this (in fact) beta stage of ROF....not IL2 1946....

Ya, I agree with ya...

Its pretty hard to escape the reality of the internet. The idea of the internet was to put information in the hands of the "people", and for the most part the "free" exchange of information is the most successful aspect of the internet in the 21st century. But along with information the individual now has the opportunity to express oneself to a world audience. Its just sad that so many people either mistake rudeness for self expression (empowered by the anonymity of the internet) or lack the imagination to explore the world of language and how it can help define who we are. The internet is still pretty young and mabey at some point a more mature attitude will develop...(rant over...)

Agreed 100%.

Though I doubt it will improve much. Humans always showed the most ugly sides of their personality, hiding behind the anonymity of a mask, a vail or a uniform. Same for primates, btw.
So I guess it comes down to the individuals personality to be pleased with a half-filled glas or shout and scream because it's half-empty. The later are not the majority though, just the ones that shout the loudest and the most often... ;)

Well, first of all BF2 doesn't try to be a simulator at all and it defiantly didn't fail both 1942 and bf2 was a huge success and is still one of the top competetive / public pc games played out there with Battlefield 3 being in the works as well.

Arma 2 approaches a combat simulator and it succeeds i mean it has loads of bugs but there is no game that comes close in it's overall realism , sure it doesn't have the indepth FM or flightsim feel but it does it way over the arcade level for all it's vehicles and weapons.

To be honest i don't think a mega sim of which some of you guys seem to beleive in here is possible, having a tank , ship , infantry and flight sim in one and a map as larage as the one in RoF or BoB would just be impossible unless you render everything very low detailed , and exclude physics etc.

You've to remember that these games that contains different formats such as flying vs Infantry has limited maps usually smalls ones.. Arma 1,2 has a very big one for being this type of game. The ground graphics archived in Arma 2 I'd kiss Oleg if that ground graphic would be there in SoW but it won't.

Tell me how in the world it would first of all even be fun with a map as large as say whole England or more and to be able to drive tanks, seriously you'd have to drive, walk etc forever and you could get so lost that it's freaking insane i mean even a simulator has limits, besides how about wild life, civilians etc... this is just not possible on that scale not by far at this time.

I say stick to your market which is flight sims and make it as awesome as possible and model key ground objects such as AA etc which you're already doing, leave infantry , tanks and other ground based stuff for simulators like Silent Heroes , Red Orchestra etc.

Oleg is a person not a god btw chill on the fanboism it's freaking scary sometimes..almost like the John Carmack fans at ID Software ffs.

Ah, I see. Indeed that's complicated. Thanks again for the reply :).

Duuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


Is that all it will be? A few dollars... Or will this be like the CFS/FS model.. where you could be dropping $30+ just for one plane.... because if that is the route they are taking then I will just as soon pass on the sim entirely before I go that route.

[QUOTE=virre89;80676Oleg is a person not a god btw chill on the fanboism it's freaking scary sometimes..almost like the John Carmack fans at ID Software ffs.[/QUOTE]


What's scary are people who are offended that other people express their appreciation for a decent product. The product is not perfect but its the best we have in WW2 air combat. When a person says "you are a God Oleg" doesn't mean he thinks he's is a god. lol

I remember reading something like five euros or dollars can't remember exactly. I don't think they have finalized any price but if it's in the 10 dollar range its cheap. I doubt very much that it will be anywhere near $30+ dollars that could alienate many in the community. Although like you say a few companies are able to sell $30+ dollar aircraft to the CFS community. I've never bought one so I'm not sure of the quality, but if they are of high quality with many working avionic systems, thirty dollars is still very cheap. Again I doubt this will be the case with ROF aircraft.

Very nice to have some confirmation from Mr. Maddox about the upcoming SoW features.

The way i see it, SoW will be the "Linux of simulators"...a modular engine that anyone can modify and tailor to simulate different things, from aircraft to race cars.

It's not only very clever of them to take the extra time and develop something that can be used in more popular game genres that sell more games, it's also very good for us because of all the added functionality and content we will see emerging after some time. If there's so many people modding IL2 in an unofficial and difficult way, i suspect there will be even more in SoW if they have tools that will make the job easier and cheat-proof. ;)

+1 :grin:

true in life, so many negitive peoples. good for us that we have oleg, a very positive person to lead the way :grin:

I wonder if we will have a "squad of soldiers" in objects list to march with tanks that would look so cool from up in the air

Nodes, my dear chap nodes... You spawn at combat nodes where the action is while the rest is handled by the AI...

But again speaking from an SEOW background the ability to plan ground movements and combats is already in IL2.
Adding infantry and other cool stuff will advance the game for sure...
Straffing an airfield with troops scattering in every direction???? If you only fligh up high in a boom and zoom plane you will miss half the fun. But for us who like to get down and dirty in the mud, well the more objects the better.

As for the complete warfare package, air land and sea. Arma 2 has shown it is possible. While SOW is unlikely to have it the fact that Oleg has thought that far ahead is the reason why Il2 has stood the test of time.
My guess is if it is not Oleg himself that does it it will be a third party doing it with the SOW engine.

The fact that he has not totally ruled out online authentication is in my opinion a great step forward as well.

I didn't say they failed as a game, but they utterly failed as battlefield-simulations, though they're even named after that high goal! Even ArmA2 is merely an extended Ego-Shooter, that implemented aircraft and vehicles because they somewhat belong to warfare, but they are still far from being ment seriously. And while all the games noted succeeded as games, they utterly failed in simulating even the most basic physics, as this ArmA2-Video shows pretty nicely:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SP-n4F_n4UU

And this is not a mere bug, it's ArmAs physics. Hell, the game doesn't even fit the aircraft with flares and chaff, but tons of Anti-Air tanks and launchers! And don't tell me, that they couldn't modell this level of detail!


And to the speed-differences: I think you have a basic misconception of modern warfare and game-design as well. While there is a frontline in war, it does not mean that there are thousands of units fighting in a single long line along that hundreds of kilometer long front. Most of the action is taking place at a limited area at a time, with spearheads and massed units attacking and defending for a strategic point. Infact, it's that exact slow motion you mentioned for games, that dictates this.

So back into the game, while the aircraft may spawn at an airbase some 10km behind the fenceline, your tank-platoon might just spawn at the depot 1km behind the action.
That not only makes it more suitable for playing, but also more realstic compared to planes in the games you named, that rearm by flying at 100ft and Mach1 over an airfield to rearm and repair and reappear fully armed 20 seconds after the last bombrun.

1914-1918 no avionics... and I dunno... for me even $10 for just one aircraft is steep.... I'll be watching this closely and waiting for SoW.

Take a look at what i wrote again plox.
Like i said Arma 2 is way over the arcade limit and more towards simulation in all of its areas especially when it comes to handling the infantry combat, however it's still far from an in depth simulator in specific areas but the game is defiantly not an Arcade shooter and it proves itself worthy very well.

The physics, FM and Aero dynamics you'll see in SoW for airplanes etc just won't be possible in an overall sim today. If Arma 2 would've had physics for infantry and a very advanced fm , aerodynamic systems etc for everything even tanks and boats and a rendered map as large as RoF for example and with the graphics of Arma 2 the system requirements and optimization issues would be insane, not to mention the bug list.

You can't honestly believe that Oleg will have you're dream game of a Sub simulator better looking, handling than Silent Heroes at the same time handle Infantry combat better than Arma 2 and keep Tank combat on such a detailed level in graphics , bullet simulation such as Red Orchestra and STILL have all the elements that is planned for Storm of War in the air.

Do you know what it is you're asking for lol? No offense but you better get that supercomputer asap..and the development time, buglist of a game @ this scale would be of the chart unless you're at least 300+ working on it... would it be worth it in the end.. doubtful. It's better to focus on one area and make it as good as possible instead since the market for even attempting something like this is to small anyway.

Sure Olegs engine has support for creating vehicles etc on the ground does that mean it will handle better than say Red Orchestra hell no were did you get that from. I am expecting the best ever created ww2-FLIGHT sim from Oleg with SoW BoB nothing more nothing less and if he can pull of a miracle in some other area at the same time then so be it , i will be happy but i bet my arm it won't happen.

-Cheers

The way I understood it when discussed was approximately $10-$15 per pack and there would usually be at least 2 aircraft as well as other additional content per pack. That was some time ago (maybe 2 months?) and could have changed, but regardless, it wouldn't be prohibitive to those interested and already playing the game.

All of the patches, and subsequent new content included, made anticipation and excitement in the IL2 community grow to a virtual crescendo. When PE2 and Manchuria were close to release and slated to be "paid" add-ons, most people were more than happy to support them and the flight-sim community in general by proxy.

Like it or not, things are what they are and if the price is too high, bugs too frequent and quality too low, people won't buy it or perpetuate it with continued purchases of add-on content. If it IS of high quality and bugs are few, those interested will, no doubt, support it.

Look at the other end of the spectrum...Warbirds. It's pay-to-play. I don't like it and never got beyond my initial purchase. It sat on the shelf and hasn't even been on my HD in over 6 years. The quality wasn't there and the detail was spartan compared to IL2. Regardless, it still has a viable, enthusiastic (if small) following.

I don't think the RoF developers are looking at taking the sim world by storm (I could be wrong though). What I think they are trying to do is bring an era (WWI) back into the current level of detail and quality possible with the latest hardware and developement software. If they are successful at that, I'm "all-in".

That doesn't mean I'll forsake my greatest interest (WWII combat flight sims),b ut for me it doesn't have to one or the other.


My .02c

As far as I'm concerned, ROF should stand for "Rip off fans" instead of Rise of Flight.

Well, virre89, I think you're missing the point:

If there is a solid physics programmed, it does not matter if it is a bullet fired by a soldier or a bullet fired from a flying plane. It also doesn't matter if there is a tank running over a field or a plane. And it also doesn't matter if there is a 30mm HE-shell exploding that was fired by a groundcannon or by an aircraft gun. The physics behind it are the same and in these examples probably not even too complicated.

Now, if that tank has its system modelled in such a detail as the plane has, is a completely different question and Oleg already answered this one and stated, that ground-units will have more simplified damage-models and controls for reasons of usability and damage-effects. Simplified, yes, but not in terms of controling a plane while flying backwards and not like in BF2 to fly tighter circles the faster you go.

But then, if you're such a fan of ArmA2, what did it model that is so important for ground-battle? AI to provide large battles? Well, AI is surely not the best part of ArmA2. So did they model the vegetation good? Yes, looks great - just that the AI can look through it and you can disable gras in the options. So did they at least implement complex hit-detection and wound-treatment, like in AmericasArmy3? Not really. Complex damage models of vehicles maybe? Rather not, to be honest. Weather effects? Yes, pretty nice looking - just doesn't effect AI.

So, if you know all this, how can you still keep saying that ArmA2 is the untouchable queen of infantry-combat simulations and no honest simulation will never ever be able to reach these features? What features? The pretty trees?
Never though I'd say that, but just look what the unspeakables accomplished in a matter of months without adequate editors and programming tools!


@RoF
Looked forward a long time for this, but with all the heat about the staggered release and the dates being pushed back ever more in combination with the other downsides rather cooled my interest down. Who knows, I might still get it, but so far it's not even clear if it will ever be released in Europe and no official word from the devs still.

+1

I ment the modern FS models with complex avionics if modelled could hit a $30+ dollar price point.

With the high cost of development, and time, it's easy to understand their business plan. I don't mind supporting them early on and hopefully the support will be large enough for them to build on what appears to be a very good base. What I see so far is a very talented ROF team that could use our support to establish themselves. ROF could blossum into the gold standard of WW1 flight sims. The initial thirty-nine bucks is a very cheap night out.

My only complaint would be it should have been something like six aircraft available then pay a nominal fee for each additional aircraft. That said Oleg was able to sell additional maps and content, but ROF only has one map with conscentrated WW1 activities. So their avenue of revenue is with the aircraft sales.

ROF = Wait & See, 4 me. tee-he

A physics system that works out the ballistics for all types of guns and ammunition would be ideal yes but would it be possible , probably not with todays standards.

Arma 2 was just an example used i didn't say it was the untouchable queen i just said that it's the most realistic infantry simulation out there along with Red Orchestra.. give me a better example if you have one i'd be glad to try it. But speaking of preaching maybe you should lay of the imagination that BoB would beat out all these games in one single package, it ain't gonna happen even if your a huge fan of Oleg and Il2.

Still you fail to understand why the game(arma2) excludes uber fm/simulation in all areas, the game instead focuses to try and capture a semi-simulation at all angles, for example if you'd put characters physics on the soldiers in Arma 2 you'd be up for an insane CPU loss right there especially with that render distance. (always a balance between gameplay, realism and optimization)

We're not talking about COD or AA3 were you have a contained map as little as my shoe, that's also why AA3 has the ability to model some stuff more heavily seeing as it's only focused on CC infantry combat.

Sure i has it's issues i mean so does IL2 or any other game out there and to be honest Arma / OFP have always been leaned towards online play / mods.

Last but not least you mention that you can turn of grass and stuff, you say this just to try and point out bad stuff or? I mean come on for the love of god it's a matter optimization not everyone runs a monster system and any configuration you can get your hands on is great.

Just like you can play on arcade or sim servers in IL2 or turn on/off all assistance, in Arma 2 you can play on servers with locked setting and only first person view etc etc or you can play it arcade yada yada i don't see were you want to go with this except more than picking on Arma , my intention was never to preach about Arma just so you know I just used it as an example.

Can we leave the "IL2 patriotism & everything else sucks mood" at home for one single discussion?
Anyway Feurfalke RoF shipped last night if you ain't updated , i just noticed.

Ca 10 $/€ per "pack" sounds cheap, untill one look at what one get to start of with for 40 od bucks.

How many "packs" u neeed till u get to orginal IL2 for ex? (30 od flyables aircrafts)


A s**t load of money (for a game only) if my math isnt completly out of wack from old age.

Too right. THis will never happen again, its just not financially viable. But it does buy you a shed load of loyal players including me. No developer has ever done it to the extent of Oleg and Co.

Anyone here who has an Xbox360 or has experiance of the Asian PC games market knows of the future. Micropayment DLC, free to play core + micropayment addons etc.

So what we're going to see with SoW is not just a CFS, but a generic simulation / game engine?

Cool 8)

Now if Mr. Maddox et. al. do take the trouble and implement a systems / equipment interface as well (i.e. make it possible for anyone to do, say, a technically accurate flight director as an object / module for the sim or whatever) then this bugger will not only lure all FSxxx modellers over, but pretty much wipe the floor with anything else out there! Save maybe for DCS...

Looking good in other words 8)

PS. Tell everyone I said hi :)

Dont get me wrong.. I don't mind paying for updates.... I just refuse to do like in CFS/FS.. which is the only other example I can give of what my particular issue is .. $10-$15 for at least 2 planes and additional content.. is not bad... but $30 just for one Spitfire say... or P-47 (even if it is multiple varients..) is not for me. I bought the Wings of Power add on for FSX by Shockwave....

I couldn't speak ion that until I actually had the sim... "Rip Off Fans" is kinda strong... and if you dont have the sim then you are just talking out the side of your neck anyway....


Point taken... especially if they are done well.... but I still wouldn't buy them.

Wise............

Rof does not seem to be what I would enjoy, but I'll wait and see, and keep an open mind...the soon to be comments will be the judge for me

Then you do best in getting them from a place such as SIMHQ were theres not a 90% influence by IL2 fanboys.

No, there's just an influence by 90% RoF Fanboys. :lol: To me the SimHQ staff tries to be objective, but there are a handful of Yay-Sayers who tried to talk critical questions into the dirt. Can't think they've stopped those tactics. A SimHQ review is probably the better source for objective information than their board (at the moment, that is).

LMAO - don't they know? 2 weeks (c) Oleg Maddox :D

What does that have to do with ROF???

It's true that SIMHQ has RoF fanboys but it's still a more neutral board than this one.

WTF

Look at the top of this forum............what do you see............

Its like going to a Microsoft FSX website and accusing them of preferring FSX to IL2 !!!!!!

What else are you expecting from an Official IL2 1c forum ?

Omg, read what we were discussing instead.
He said he was gonna base his decision of buying RoF in the soon to follow comments(hopefully he listens to reviews instead) etc about the game, only thing i said was you better get those from somewhere else than these boards seeing as people here tend to patriotism IL2 and throw garbage at RoF without even trying it. So i said Simhq is a good place for a more neutral point of view..

But sure there are a lot of decent people here as well which don't care much for worshiping products for no reason.