Quote:
Originally Posted by csThor
This is where we seem to disagree then. A historical simulation must remain true to itself IMO. And as such historical relevance is the "Make or Break" criteria for me - it was either relevant or it wasn't. I have no use for the "KeWl" factor some people seem to be so fond of ...
Quite frankly the Su-26 is more a proof of concept than the autogyro. I don't want to cling to this example too much,though, as I'm talking about a general principle here. As I said above the core of a historical simulation is its attempt to simulate historical air combat. Any other ... derivated use ... is and has to be secondary to historical accuracy. Such use can be derived from a historically correct base, but a historically correct use cannot be derived from a fundament made of "KeWl" objects which aren't historically relevant.
|
Well, that seems to be the problem, then. SoW is not a historic simulation. BoB is.
SoW is a unique engine to simulate aircraft and vehicles in a combat environment.
BoB however is the first "addon", if you allow me to put it like this. The first of a series of addons with historic content on a limited area and time-setting.
Bringing both things together in SOW:BOB means showing what can be done on the one hand, simulating the Battle of Britain on the other. IMHO the autogyro is a child to both fathers, the SU to the first, the other planes to the later.
It has little to do with the cool-factor, but rather with the fact that MG has a wider perspective than just putting up a game for us with a few historic planes.