Frame rate is king

[jimbop]

Key measures by which I will judge the game are:
1. Frame rate
2. Flight models
3. Damage models
4. Graphics (assuming at least a slight improvement over IL-2)
5. Sound (I suppose it has to be on this list in this forum!)

In that order. FPS is king for me; I just can’t stand freezes or stutters in any game since it completely kills immersion. I realise that the other measures are critical to the game’s success but none of the other issues would actually stop me playing since I am assuming that they will be at least as good as IL-2 (which I still have zero problem playing).

How about for you? Which is your most important measure of success? Or have I forgotten about something?

1. Frame rate
Damage models
Flight models
4. Graphics

[sigur_ros]

Gameplay priority

1. AI
2. Historical accurate number planes in sky
3. Flight model
4. Frame rate
5. Sound
6. Graphics
7. Damage model

[SG1_Gunkan]

To me the top ones priorities:

1. Online play
0. Historical accuracy

[jimbop]

Originally Posted by sigur_ros

Gameplay priority

1. AI
2. Historical accurate number planes in sky
3. Flight model
4. Frame rate
5. Sound
6. Graphics
7. Damage model

Good one - I was thinking mostly of online play but I guess 1 & 2 are important for that too.

[rga]

1. Immersion
2. Everything else

[Insuber]

1. Having the game published
2. Developers support for the next year to solve bugs, with regular patches
3. Developers team survival for many years, to expand the series
5. Open game architecture to allow third party and community add-ons
4. All the rest will come (fps, DM etc.)

Cheers,
Insuber

[jimbop]

Originally Posted by Insuber

1. Having the game published
2. Developers support for the next year to solve bugs, with regular patches
3. Developers team survival for many years, to expand the series
5. Open game architecture to allow third party and community add-ons
4. All the rest will come (fps, DM etc.)

Cheers,
Insuber

Yep, fully agree with your other post. Having it published now, bugs and all, is the best chance for CoD to be a proper successor for IL-2. Looking forward to it.

[IAF_Phantom]

1. Flight Models (meaning - is this a simulator or just a "game"?)
2. Multiply
3. Historical Accuracy
4. Damage Models
5. Immersion
6. AI
7. Sounds
8. Graphics
9. Frame rates

[mazex]

Originally Posted by Insuber

1. Having the game published
2. Developers support for the next year to solve bugs, with regular patches
3. Developers team survival for many years, to expand the series
5. Open game architecture to allow third party and community add-ons
4. All the rest will come (fps, DM etc.)

Cheers,
Insuber

+1

But with this "cummunity" I'm very pessimistic about that happening which is EXTREMELY sad. We finally get the only serious new WWII sim released in years (and for years to come if not the RoF bunch goes WWII). And what happens? Every week a new problem starts a mass psychosis here and half of the "community" threatens to cancel their pre orders... Colors, lack of multi threading, lack of x64 exe, no german campaign (but there was one), Steam, Published by Ubisoft, No dynamic campaign, bad fps due to epilepsy filter (which I really think is a minor reason for the bad fps) etc. Every week a new thread with threats and the facts are in most cases rumors that have been circulated after some vague comments on the Russian forums.

I'm starting to loose hope i the human race after all this crap actually...