![]() |
|
IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games. |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mission making shouldn't be this hard and it shouldn't be such a necessity in the first place. That's the point. I've done a few missions in IL-2 1946 and it's fairly hard, even with the limited scope of the FMB, to do a good mission. The last time I tried the FMB in CloD it was like all the bad stuff from the 1946 FMB with a whole lot of other stuff on top I had to learn that made it an even bigger pain.
I'm not begrudging having a powerful FMB, other flight sims and ARMA both come with one and people have used it to make some really cool stuff but those games at least came with some content out of the box. Some even come with dynamic mission generators of varying quality. The way I figure it, if I have to learn so much scripting to get ANY content other than a lacklustre SP campaign and a few anaemic multiplayer maps, I may as well go ahead a step further and just code myself a flight sim. Hell, maybe I ought to do that, I can even sell it on services like Steam! I'll call it PE-2 Petlyakov - Canterbury Fields. The graphics will be great and I'm sure you'll love it. The physics modelling will be up to the player but I'm sure that won't be a problem, it's not that hard to make with the physics model tools I'll include. Don't worry about the lack of documentation, I'm sure one of my loyal fans will write a wiki. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Quote:
And the only thing that's changed between the old IL2 / new IL2 FMB is just how many more possibilities you can have in it. Placing objects, spawn areas, AI, etc.,etc., are virtually the same. The 3rd party stuff will come that does many of the coded things you could do in the old game for the new. The documentation is needed, I agree, but for anyone that did any missions in the old IL2 it shouldn't be hard to make an old IL246 type mission with the new FMB, with the exception of the traditional old IL2 COOP. The hardest part is making the mission work in the bug filled environment we have atm. But that's not a fault of the FMB. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Bliss, I made lots of DF missions in the old IL2 FMB. I cannot even begin to fathom the new CloD FMB, as I have said. And I'm not talking about scripting. I spent hours one day just trying to make a simple 2 base mission, and you know what? It didn't work.
I'm not saying that the new wonderful stuff in the FMB should be eliminated, I love what the programmer types are doing with missions. But why change the basic things like base and object placement? Why? Russian designed GUIs, and any other control interface that they do, are hard enough to understand, why change what worked in the old sim? It boggles the mind really.
__________________
![]() Personally speaking, the P-40 could contend on an equal footing with all the types of Messerschmitts, almost to the end of 1943. ~Nikolay Gerasimovitch Golodnikov |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
They set the bases for a great FMB, but the more complex this is more complex interface you need to manage it, above all if we're talking about design. Probably they got no time to do it, as many other thing in this sim. Of course one day an user-friendly UI will be developed.. by them or a third developer...
__________________
![]() A whole generation of pilots learned to treasure the Spitfire for its delightful response to aerobatic manoeuvres and its handiness as a dogfighter. Iit is odd that they had continued to esteem these qualities over those of other fighters in spite of the fact that they were of only secondary importance tactically.Thus it is doubly ironic that the Spitfire’s reputation would habitually be established by reference to archaic, non-tactical criteria. Last edited by 6S.Manu; 03-26-2012 at 12:54 AM. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
You could do that in 20 seconds. How is that hard? And why didn't it work? |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|