Oleg's dream

[Foo'bar]

This time UBI are the good guys. Why things went to what we have today is resposibility of 1C:Softclub.

[Feathered_IV]

Originally Posted by Foo'bar

This time UBI are the good guys. Why things went to what we have today is resposibility of 1C:Softclub.

How so?

[csThor]

"Corporate restructuring" I believe was the phrase used. Translation: too many suits, too many beancounters, too little creative freedom. That's what the grapevine said.

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by Feathered_IV

I think he bit off more than MG could comfortably chew. CoD became overdesigned and top heavy with complex features. He got off track between the need to make a simulator, and the urge to make a replica.

It was never Olegs way to admit an error or to back down in the face of public opinion (the 190 bar is still right and Il-2's sound is excellent, it's just our sound system that is wrong etc.). So when CoD began to look like it needed fundamental changes at a core level, he headed for the door.

That sounds the most plausible I guess, pity the way things turned out for now.

[RocketDog]

It's pretty clear that the project was mishandled from within the CloD dev team. They seem to have greatly underestimated the amount of work involved in completing all the game elements they wanted and eventually just exhausted 1C/Ubisoft's patience, resulting in them being told to get some sort of bare-bones product out the door and try and deliver at least some income - even if a lot of things were unfinished. That would explain how we ended up with highly-detailed tanks, but a lime-green England and broken or poor FSAA/campaign/weather/sounds etc.

My guess is that Maddox just wasn't equal to the task of managing development and was asked to leave so someone else could take over. I suppose the buck ultimately stops with 1C, who should have removed him from the project earlier, or at least got someone with project management expertise put in the team to take charge of development.

All speculation, of course, but I think it's a likely explanation.

[Baron]

Originally Posted by RocketDog

It's pretty clear that the project was mishandled from within the CloD dev team. They seem to have greatly underestimated the amount of work involved in completing all the game elements THEY wanted and eventually just exhausted 1C/Ubisoft's patience, resulting in them being told to get some sort of bare-bones product out the door and try and deliver at least some income - even if a lot of things were unfinished. That would explain how we ended up with highly-detailed tanks, but a lime-green England and broken or poor FSAA/campaign/weather/sounds etc.

My guess is that Maddox just wasn't equal to the task of managing development and was asked to leave so someone else could take over. I suppose the buck ultimately stops with 1C, who should have removed him from the project earlier, or at least got someone with project management expertise put in the team to take charge of development.

All speculation, of course, but I think it's a likely explanation.

They? They? You are joking, right?

Theese freeking forums wouldnt back of from ANYTHING until Oleg and team bend t over and did as they where told regarding every little FREEKING detail, and i do mean EVERY detail. Changing colour of grass (witch, needless to say, came out wrong all the same, naturally, according to those who "knows") doesnt take any time what so ever, does it? Markings, correct size, font and colour of course, on all planes, at the EXACT right spot, dont worry, done in a jiffy. Correct crop marks, no sweat. Clickable cockpit? Sure why not, i`ll do it during my coffee break. Pilot headsize, colour of engine flames, dhu, of course WE know best. Antennas 1 m to far to the front? Do it again and do it right.Dynamic weather? sure, give me, but if i cant run it on my P4 i want my money back or ill report it as a fail/bug/broken to everyone and anyone who will listen, even to those who have better things to do (afaik the dynamic weather isnt broken). Dynamic lighting, why, everyone else is using it so it can take any time, can it? etc. etc. etc ad nauseum. Doesnt matter, what time spent on it, it still comes out wrong according to all the experts. (Honestly, i dont even understand why they bother). Never ever could the team reveal a new feature without it beeing followed by sh*t storm of expert opinions that wouldnt take no for an answer. And it still continuous to this day with the patches. (not talking about adult bug reporting, im talking whining and bitching "i want my money back" mentality) Because u do know, that if it doesnt work on MY pc the game is broken/buggy and needs to be set on fire and forgotten by EVERYONE, right? Doesnt matter if i cant get it to work on lap top (jesus) its still a bust i tell u.

What many of u fail to understand is that this criticism of CoD has been going on for years, literally, and the buggy, like most completely new releases (No, its not warmed over IL2 Sturmovik and if u think that i cant be bothered with "u") was only the straw that broke the camels back. It would have been a lot less buggy, if the community would have been kept out of the loop like in most game developments. Alot less "essential" features = more time to what really counts, "eye candy" can be added/tweaked later.

Iv come to realize that a lot of people here and at other CoD forums isnt happy unless there is something to give "constructive criticism" about, ABOUT EVERYTHING.

Oleg`s/dev teams problem, more than anything, is listening way to much to the community. AFTER the game was released, that would be fine, but not during critical development.

But you are right, Oleg and team promised/wanted to much because they wanted to please the IL2 community. The thing is, that u and everyone thinking the same, actually hold this against them when it didnt turn out as everyone hoped, and that, in my book, is the lowest of low. (sry if it comes across as an insult, really isnt directed at u personally)

So, please, get back to reality. (not just u) The more "real" we want it the more buggy/complicated its gonna be and the more time it takes. Is that something that needs to be said, or is hard to understand? (if u or anyone respond with anything even remotly tuching the subject of AA or FSAA for ex., ill scream. Try looking at the big picture and how everything is connected before responding with something thats been said a gazillion times allredy)

Just for once i wich people would look at what we DO have but something tells me that alot of it is way over their heads in term of complexity so its completely missed or seen as a "given" (comparing BF3 or god knows what else with CoD kind of reinforces that feeling). Instead, look at what we have compared to what we had before, IL2 (not counting bugs thats not really a suprise they are there this early to begin with and lets face it, IL2 is far from perfect or bug free) and not what "you`r" head thought/wished it would be after all these years of fantasising. RoF for ex, was faaaar from perfect on release. its taken them 2, count them, 2 years getting a descent campaign working.

At this point it doesnt matter one bit that u people think u have been "cheated" into buying a beta, cold hard truth i know, but if it really pains u that much to have this game on your pc, remove it and pretend it hasnt been released yet and let those who at least appreciate getting to see the game first hand instead of through friday updates (witch, in all honesty, only gave us headaches) after waiting 5 years, instead of having to hear endless complaints about not being released yet, do thire "thing" so we can get somewhere, anywhere but at this point in time = a Cod we all want.

It takes time, doesnt really matter what "U" (not u in particular) think it SHOULD take, it doesnt make it go any faster, deal with it or move on.


Holy moley, rants off.

[TeeJay82]

And all of this agony could have been avoided if they had sold it as beta and not a final product

[Redroach]

Originally Posted by Feathered_IV

I think he bit off more than MG could comfortably chew. CoD became overdesigned and top heavy with complex features. He got off track between the need to make a simulator, and the urge to make a replica.

Yet this obsession with detail is what is expected from CoD. Il-2 was committed to realism, it did great for its time and people liked it very much. Which is quite logical, as most of the WW2 aviation buffs would want to re-enact the deeds of their 'heroes' as realistically as possible.
And CoD just HAD to ramp up the realism standards by a fair margin, there's no doubt about that. Actually, things like gear wheels spinning down while being retracted, that is the very thing that keeps me attached to CoD. Without the rich realism features, there would be nothing that distinguishes it from random simulation XY and no one would even talk about the botched release of CoD anymore.

My bet is that the only guy that could remotely handle the programming necessary for CoD was Oleg. And he may indeed have been distracted by whatever it was; others pushed for more progress and so he left. Leaving no one that had the insight into CoD's code. So the rest of the team struggled to at least put out the alpha version we got to know, and to learn more things about the CoD core along the way, in order to fix things.

Okay, speculations solved, let's move on. How about a big air war on the repka servers tonight? I'll fly a Schwarm of Me110s

[MD_Titus]

Originally Posted by proton45

Yea...the "heart" of the community seems to be non existent. If you show any kind of support for the development team, or what Oleg has done...people brand you a "kiss arse", or a "follower", or whatever it is that negative people say.

yeah, but 9 times out of 10 the join date next to those posts says april 2011 and i completely disregard them. so many rage posts from il2 newbs, they were never the heart of the game or the community if they didn't show interest or a desire to post before release.

two months since release, patches being worked on, i've seen huge performance increases since initial release and i'm happy it's on the curve it is. right direction, diamond in the rough and all that. i just hope it is allowed to continue and is not killed off (the game or the forums) by retards whining bitching and crying like the kids you usually see in a call of duty forum.

as to the detail aspect - pc gamer review said something along the lines of currently this isn't a game, but it is a fantastic virtual museum with an unprecedented level of detail and accuracy, faithfully reproducing it's subject matter, and that it has the potential to be an awesome simulator. it finished by advising to give it a shot in a few months after issues had been patched.

[Honeymonster]

two months since release, patches being worked on, i've seen huge performance increases since initial release and i'm happy it's on the curve it is. right direction, diamond in the rough and all that. i just hope it is allowed to continue and is not killed off (the game or the forums) by retards whining bitching and crying like the kids you usually see in a call of duty forum.

Great post which sums up mine and many other peoples thoughts. It needs to be posted in at least 5 other threads similar to this one though.