Friday 2010-10-29 Dev. update and Discussion

Originally Posted by Antoninus

Thirdwire productions are selling their games without any DRM at all. Just over the internet with no big publisher and his marketing department behind them. And they still stay in business.

They should search for a way that actually works, not DRM that is cracked within a few weeks. Annoy the pirates not their loyal customers. Maybe something like marked versions to more easily track them down or make sure that each new patch won't work with the pirated copies.

Well that is a positive and constructive post..Thx Antonionus...
You see, there are options to explore...But it is allways hard for us to evaluate the actual effectiveness of such and such anti-pirating method.
I am sure that a lot of our dear members would scream to death if there was no hard copy of SOW...I've been in the music industry since 1984, and like everyone knows, we do have the same issues...

And let me tell you that in the long run, once the business is no longer a business because of piracy, it is the artists that pay the price...and the musicians, recording engineer, and everyone who used to make quality records....
How much would we be willing to pay for top quality sim like SOW ?
What would be a realistic price in comparison to other crappy games that sell for $60.00?
How much MORE money would we be willing to pay to get SOW without any kind of protection ?

Personnaly, I would pay $ 120.00 for SOW if that was to ensure the survival of top quality product like SOW....

Salute !

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by speculum jockey

Why do you think that Tree is wrong and saqson is right when all saqson does is post replies full of and "you didn't hear it from me!"

You must be serious if you haven't anything funny to say about it.

I didn't say either, but I'm certainly not interested in massaging the ego of Tree. "I know a big hitter at Ubi blah blah"

There's absolutely nothing anybody can do about whoever the publisher is, the deal would've signed months or even years ago.

[T}{OR]

Originally Posted by Osprey

There's absolutely nothing anybody can do about whoever the publisher is, the deal would've signed months or even years ago.

From my observations on 1C forums - actually the answer is few months or even a month ago.

[philip.ed]

To be fair, Tree posted the whole conversation with Ubi at the time. Tree's evidence is tangible, where as sasquon's barely borders on credible.

[mazex]

Originally Posted by T}{OR

From my observations on 1C forums - actually the answer is few months or even a month ago.

Yep, if a western publisher has existed for many months or years they should be taken behind a shed and shot for not doing any PR work at all for this title...

[Dano]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

Nothing on them posters with the words UBI on them.

Did UBi have anything to do with the Russian release of IL2?

[Triggaaar]

Originally Posted by SaQSoN

It's "no matter, if this true, or not - you didn't hear it from me, you don't know me and I never have told you anything".

No worries, you've said more than enough, and should now delete your posts.

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

Over a year ago i posted up my conversation with james oreilly at ubisoft, they dont come much higher than him hes the group brand manager.

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

dont listen to these guys who pretend that they are on the 'inner circle' half of them are full of shite.

Mmm.

[Redwan]

Thanks for your interesting comments about the clouds. I have made some researches on the web and indeed it seems that the FSX clouds, although quite realistic, are not very 3D. They are reported to vanish when one flies through them without occulting the view, which is, I agree, not compatible with the requirements of a combat flight sim.

However I’m still not happy with the graphic quality of the BoB clouds seen until now.

They look too much like an ensemble of cotton wool balls and I hope that Oleg’s team will find a solution to make them look more homogeneous in the future.

And I even don’t talk about heaving a complex multilayer cloud system (even if Oleg promised that … but he promised so many things …) like this:



… but at least I would like to have some realistic looking cumulus’s.

When thermals are active in the middle of a sunny day, the bottoms of these clouds should be more flat, more compact and much darker ! Is it so difficult for an advanced graphic engine like the one used in BoB to produce something more realistic ?

Where are the dynamic wind effects that are claimed by Oleg to be affecting the shapes of the clouds ? Until now, all the clouds I have seen look all similar, like so many clones of one single cotton wool ball floating in a static and boring atmosphere.

Let’s compare BoB and the reality.



With some little photoshop changes BoB clouds could look much more realistic and I can’t believe that BoB’s graphic engine cannot do that. I think that the poor quality of clouds is due to a lack of attention to the completions (lack of time, budget, need to focus on more important bugs …)



PS. Even if I seem to focus on the quality of the clouds (which is quite normal as far as we talk about a flight simulator), please keep in mind that I really appreciate the other great qualities of BoB and the improvements done since Il2.

Originally Posted by Osprey

You must be serious if you haven't anything funny to say about it.

I didn't say either, but I'm certainly not interested in massaging the ego of Tree. "I know a big hitter at Ubi blah blah"

There's absolutely nothing anybody can do about whoever the publisher is, the deal would've signed months or even years ago.

To be fair to you your a relatively new here so you would not have seen the any of the earlier posts regarding UBI.

[Chivas]

We have no verify-able source for the existence of a western publisher. UBI hasn't commented since 2006, Oleg hasn't commented. We have a forum member who says he's talked to UBI, but thats not verify-able. Either way it doesn't matter, we will get copies in the west one way or another.

Hopefully there will be some type of workable copy protection. I get a kick out of people who say copy right protection isn't needed...and wonder what they would be say, if it were their product, and their money people were stealing.