Here we go again...of course it makes an impact.
You know, i take all this time to write long posts in an effort to cover all angles and be polite but i suspect nobody reads them
So, i'll say it short this time.
It's not what you say, it's how you say it.
"Oleg, i think that the squadron codes are wrong. I have this and that historical references and these pictures. Do you think they could be changed before release or looked at in a post-release patch? Also, nice to see your efforts on the terrain, the draw distance is very good and the amount of objects higher than most other flight sims, but the color palette needs some work. If you are interested, i can provide you with some references"--> GOOD. It provides useful feedback in a respectable manner and the user is making an effort to make himself useful instead of only pointing fingers.
"Oh no! The terrain colours are totally wrong and the texture resolution is appalling. To be honest, i can't see how this is up to par for a 2010 sim, when we have better looking terrain in IL2 already"--> BAD. It simply points out the flaws without providing any amount of information as to what's wrong in the poster's opinion. It also degrades the work of professionals and when that happens by amateurs, it saps any kind of credibility the poster might have had with a better choice of words.
It's perfectly fine to say things are in need of improvement. It's not fine at all to say "things are crap, please fix it" while doing nothing at all to specify what needs fixing or how.