Let's help the Developer's of BoM. What would you like to see in the new sim

[hiro]

I'm going to go with these guys . . .

Originally Posted by Feathered_IV

Less gimmicks. More soul. A development team that knows its capabilities a and does not overreach itself. I'd rather have a very good sim that works, than a brilliant one that does not.

Originally Posted by csThor

Uhhh ... how about a game instead of just a beta engine?

and set the bar low.


Just have a working game with a solid game engine. No CTD, no stutters, runs on a decent current ( 2013 / 2014 or whenever the release is) system. Essentially its just install, set features and go.



Ok, maybe some immersion stuff, like decently accurate FM, DM, physics, and others like sound and CEM . . . and great graphics . . .

Even if it came with a plane set like 4 fighters, 2 big bombers, a recon plane, and 2 attack (cuz the Il-2 is in it), just as long as its a solid, working game.

And even if ground targets were buildings, 1 tank type, 1 jeep or car type.

[David198502]

more realism!
-completely working cockpits(im sick of hitting the I button and im even more sick of hitting the W button)

-no arcade compasses or other dumbed down systems to please a minority(at least make it optional and give the option for full realistic and historical gauges)

-FMs closer to reality!(right now in my view clods biggest problem is the underperforming planes of the RAF.i know that all planes are too slow, and im a 109 guy, but its sad, that so many people cant really enjoy the sim, as the Fms are really way off)

-as already mentioned....working weather!in my view it doesnt even have to be dynamic if thats too performance demanding.better make a static but really working weather, where contacts cant be spotted with ease through clouds, and where clouds are really visible the same way for all the players.thunderstorms, flashes, turbulences....its a flight sim.

-things that worked in 1946 and now are missing in clod!there are many of them...although im not the guy who shoots at parachutes...i still want the possibility to do so...and that i can collide with them as well(note this is one really minor feature, of many, which were already working in clods predecessor, and now are completely missing)

-bailout animation, and other animations!looking around after bailing out, and mabye having to pull the cord...

-dedication to things like blind landing systems(if historical available at that time period)
in my view it was a massive improvement with the 4.10 patch in 1946, to have a more realistic navigation, with working radio beacons and landing systems like Lorenz)

-no IL2 girl!

-dynamic campaign

-a personal whish, where i dont know if many share that view: better make less planes, but with more love to details....look at DCS and you know what i mean.

-if possible, collision with trees!

....to be continued

[He111]

Allow the community to develop their own stuff - SDK ?

1C could save a huge development bill by releasing the source code to fans and move the development team to something more important ... Real Warfare - Rome !

I want a flyable Defiant, Whimpy etc and would be willing to pay and invest my own time to get such. maybe not what others want but a nice add on to build CLODs plane base.

.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Originally Posted by He111

I want a flyable Defiant, Whimpy etc .

A flyable Beaufighter would be nice as well.

Everytime I spawn in my Blenhiem next to a shutdown Beaufighter I promise myself I ask for a transfer IF I get back alive!

[Toni74]

Originally Posted by Kodoss

Historical cockpits!

The cockpit of the Bf 110 is so far from reality that it really hurts.
Even the description on the left circuit breaker box by the pilot (which came with the E-series) is wrong.

so true.

we even didn't get any single statement about all the facts and errors reported so far for Bf 110 on that bloody bugtracker wich even haven't been visited by any single developer so far.

useless.

[slm]

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

I think threads like these have the potential danger to repeat past community mistake. "I hope they do this, I hope they do that"...turns into "I expected this, I expected that" when the sequel comes out. Then when it doesn't materialize...which it won't, then there is disappointment.

Some companies actually ask their customers about which features would be useful. And if they have a list of features they consider implementing, user can put them to importance order. Polls like this are easy to do using free SW like www.surveymonkey.com
I'm pretty sure if 1c made such survey, the results would be useful for both development and users.

I agree with Feathered_IV who wrote " I'd rather have a very good sim that works, than a brilliant one that does not. "

[senseispcc]

.
If you ask what I want in Battle for Moscow ...
the same quality than in Cliff of Dover with a little more
Weather (more diversity)
and maybe a easy way to populate the map or a already populated map by this I mean a map with ground "things" on them but maybe friendly and not so friendly airplanes generated at "random"!

[341_Knight]

One that actually works would be nice