Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover

IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #121  
Old 10-01-2012, 10:49 AM
jimbop jimbop is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,064
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Feathered_IV View Post
I don't know. Reading his comments I get the feeling that his creative philosophy is so far from mine that the sequel will be a rather hollow experience and one that is sadly not for me.
Maybe but at least it will be his own 'creative philosophy' rather than someone else's that he has to work with. That's the only point I was trying to make.
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 10-01-2012, 11:01 AM
Ploughman Ploughman is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Ceinws Escairgeiliog, Cymru
Posts: 334
Default

Thanks for the replies to our questions. I look forward to the sequel and the further, more extensive, improvements to the game engine and the gamer's experience it will bring.

Will you be dropping the Il-2 Sturmovik name from future releases? Any cache Il-2 Sturmovik may've had in terms of product recognition etc., has surely been erased by the CloD debacle.
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 10-01-2012, 11:39 AM
adonys adonys is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 850
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by luthier View Post
Finally a comment that got to me. Today's a bad day after all.

It goes without saying for me, and that's why it might be hard to gather that from my reply, but it's obviously OUR fault for single-player being what it is and 3rd party support not showing up.

Your general criticism is spot on. We shipped a product that had too many technical issues for us to really focus on finer elements of gameplay. There had never been a point, we're not even there today, where we could sit back, look at the code, and say, hell, what a great foundation, let's build a great game on top of it.

The GUI especially is our Achilles heel. Like I wrote earlier in the thread, somebody somewhere before I ever showed up chose to make it in a horrible clumsy environment called WPF. By the time I showed up it was too late to go back, and going forward proved extremely painful. Each new screen took forever, everything was clunky, tiny changes or bug fixes required insane amounts of effort, and in the end it took a tremendous painful effort to reach the decidedly insufficient GUI that we have today.

It's extremely painful and frustrating for everyone involved. Believe me.
Luthier, for God's sake. please open your eyes and understand: THERE IS NO OFFLINE PLAY ATM. and that not due to lack of 3rd party content, length of official campaign or horrible GUI.

no matter how good is, or it is not, a campaign/mission made (and Desastersoft's seems quite to actually be good), it has ZERO playability value because of:
- broken AI, which won't play along with you. it's like you are not existent for them, invisible. they won't follow, they won't consider you a part of their flight
- porked combat AI (they will pass each other 300m away without noticing each other, strange combat maneuvers, lack of maneuvers when fired at, etc, etc, etc)
- broken Radio Comms - you can not get them do anything.

do you understand that those are system sooo broken they are almost inexistent? and that, without them, there's no damn single player game at all?!!

that's why the number of community made content fall out to zero. because there's no point to make anything based on systems which are not working. We had two very good dynamic persistent battlefield engines on work, and both stopped dead because of exactly this reason.

come on!!!

Last edited by adonys; 10-01-2012 at 12:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 10-01-2012, 12:03 PM
Icebear Icebear is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Antarctica
Posts: 156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Feathered_IV View Post
I don't know. Reading his comments I get the feeling that his creative philosophy is so far from mine that the sequel will be a rather hollow experience and one that is sadly not for me.
And that's the point. What do we expect? Many here are looking forward to an arcarde online flight shooter, others prefer a WW2 flight simulation, a successor of the IL2 series. I'm glad that Luthier clarified this point in is own humorous way once and for all and with no doubts. Now we all know where we stand with him and his future products.

Take it or leave it, that's his unmistakable message.
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 10-01-2012, 12:03 PM
zander zander is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 66
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II View Post
You failed to deliver a complete product, you conned most of us into believing that things would have been fixed, and now you're basically saying "hey this is what it is, so just take it and wait for the next chapter" which most of us don't even care for, since it's a theatre of action that honestly appeals just one market, the Russian one.
Hm?
Honestly, I don't give a flying F about early 109s and Spits anymore - I'm looking forward to 190s and Yaks.

btw: How are they supposed to finance further patching? I'm actually suprised they went this far.
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 10-01-2012, 12:16 PM
adonys adonys is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 850
Default

and luthier, what about community sponsored aircrafts? there might be enough volunteers to work/pay for some extra BoB not planned aircrafts, like the wellington.
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 10-01-2012, 12:19 PM
Flanker35M Flanker35M is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,806
Default

S!

Would make it easy if devs made a poll on a plane people wanted to be added and give the price for it. Very much like in RoF where you can pre-order a plane. This could appeal to other features as well. Enough paying customers = feature/plane in the game. Sure not liked by all, but..
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 10-01-2012, 12:37 PM
Skoshi Tiger Skoshi Tiger is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 2,197
Default

Personally I think that this sim is a creative work of art that should be left in the hands of the deveopers.

Put in a poll and well end up with a FW-190 Vs P-51 sim, which have been done Ad nauseam over the years.

I'ld rather the devs explored avenues of the sim that they were passionate about rather than bung out content to a formula.
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 10-01-2012, 12:49 PM
Fjordmonkey Fjordmonkey is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Larvik, Norway
Posts: 350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skoshi Tiger View Post
Personally I think that this sim is a creative work of art that should be left in the hands of the deveopers.

Put in a poll and well end up with a FW-190 Vs P-51 sim, which have been done Ad nauseam over the years.

I'ld rather the devs explored avenues of the sim that they were passionate about rather than bung out content to a formula.
Agree on this, especially since communities (especially this one) cannot agree on damn near anything.
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 10-01-2012, 01:00 PM
Meusli Meusli is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 376
Default

Thanks for the answers Luthier. I always imagined that if you turned up to answer some questions the mob mentality of a certain few would be fully unleashed. I am certainly interested in your next sequel and that is why I still visit these forums, I also feel no anger or ill will either to you or your company.

Maybe now that you have drawn a line in the sand,of where you are now and where you hope to go in the future, it will finally make these negative nancy's move on to different pastures and stop the daily crucifixion that your company receives on its own forum. That is what I hope, but I know we are unlikely to get.
__________________
Intel Core i7 920 2.66Ghz (Nehalem) @ 3.33Ghz
Gigabyte EX58-UD3R Intel X58
OCZ 6GB DDR3 PC3-10666C9 1333MHz Gold (3x2GB) Triple Channel DDR3
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 670 Windforce 3X 2048MB GDDR5
Samsung SpinPoint F1 1TB SATA-II 32MB Cache
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.