Cliffs of Dover Is The Best. But Some Of You Don't Appreciate It.

[Winger]

Originally Posted by recoilfx

I appreciate Cliffs of Dover, but I won't give a free pass on the devs for releasing an alpha game. I am sure you think CloD is the best, but you are super minority here.

This kind of fanboy post is just as annoying as end of the world hater posts.

I dont think hes minority. Cod Had and still has problems. But its also absolutely great. I can just repeat. Its not the first and will not be the last game that got released with loads of issues and still is a great game. Just like i.e. ROF. Was also bugged to hell and back at release. Look at it now. And for that matter i must really say that COD is improving MUCH faster than ROF did after its relase.

Winger

[robtek]

He definitively isn't the minority!
He belongs imho to the quiet majority of more "mature" forum members who have the patience and know from past experience what to expect from OM.
This sim isn't ready, yet.
But it will be -> the future is bright.
Even with all the bugs, for me this sim has degraded IL2-1946 to arcade, it is just no fun anymore.
I've tried RoF and have almost all planes, really no fun for me! Only furballs online -> not my kind of flying.
And jets, i can really do without them, the last interesting scenario was vietnam and there is no actual sim for those planes.

[Scarecrow]

Originally Posted by robtek

He definitively isn't the minority!
He belongs imho to the quiet majority of more "mature" forum members who have the patience and know from past experience what to expect from OM.
This sim isn't ready, yet.
But it will be -> the future is bright.
Even with all the bugs, for me this sim has degraded IL2-1946 to arcade, it is just no fun anymore.

OP +100. The silent majority, those of us who saw Forgotten Battles blossom into 1946 have the maturity and insight to understand greatness doesn't happen overnight it takes time and perseverance. Luthier will deliver and I don't have any doubt, this isn't just one game it's the new engine that'll support 10-15 years of simming, they're not gonna walk away.

[Fjordmonkey]

I see that there's many from the Instant Gratification-crowd that I'm used to dealing with in MMO's here. True, CoD wasn't released in a stellar shape. I'll ive you that. I'll also give you the point on the sim being unplayable for many, and that there's still bugs, issues and the like.

Get over it. You've bought the game that you've waited 8+ years on. You can wait a few weeks/months more for the issues to be solved. So you spent $50 (or €50 in my case) on a product that turned out less than stellar, but one that has a bright future ahead of it. Surely you can see this? Or are you too blind?

1C deserves praise for actually being on the ball when it comes to patches etc. Don't know about you, but for me there's been leaps and bounds in both playability and performance over the last few weeks, and that's more than enough to offset any ire I might have had due to the state of the game at launch. Then again, it might be extensive playing of MMO's that have taught me to have patience when it comes to any piece of software out there, regardless of type.

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by MB_Avro_UK

Hi all,

The title says it all. But I will add the following.

The problem is that many of us do not have systems that can manage the demands of Cliffs of Dover. That is NOT the developer's fault.

Yes, there are some teething problems, but nothing in comparison to the vast complexity of this production.

I have difficulty flying at low level over land. That is because my system is not powerful enough. So, I fly over the sea or over land at 7k meters. Problem solved!

Today, I flew along the south coast of England from Dover towards the West. I know this area quite well. The ground detail and accuracy is AMAZING! And just as important, I felt as though I was flying in an aircraft. I have never flown a WW2 fighter but I have a light aircraft (GA) pilot's qualification and also flew professionally in Royal Navy aircraft.

The summer haze over the Channel is magnificently represented.

This simulator is the future and it's here now.

And I use the word simulator and not game.


Here's my specs:

Windows 7 64 bit
AMD Phenon 9500 Quad Core
8 Gb RAM
Nvidia GeForce 9800 GT

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

Your GPU sucks, but you also have no idea what you are talking about. Others with better systems are having serious problems that should not be there in the first place. Now they will likely improve many of these things over time, but it is currently NOT due to hardware, but to lack of optimization/planning.

[Feathered_IV]

I have no issue with the developers over the current performance. I appreciate that optimization is underway and it does not effect my opinion of the title, despite having a lower end machine.

What I do find clouds my opinion if the "sim" is the lack of content to enable anything more than a shallow BoB-lite skirmish generator.

No warships, one merchant and a handful of lifeboats means the Channel Offensive phase is beyond reach. Pacific Fighters looks flush with ships by comparison.

One RAF voice actor for the entire group of nations involved. Sounds like he's drawing words out of a hat too.

No radar. Some arcade approximation will give you a stilted position of a nearby enemy, but for a meaningful intercept vector, height or number of contacts... Forget it.

Crew members are just decoration.

Viable Bomber numbers are barely up to a diversionary raid, let alone anything approaching the Battle of Britain in any real sense.

Never mind current performance. It's the crushing lack of HISTORICAL content, not Technical content that has already made me loose interest.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Salute

From all the whining going on here, you'd think they'd lost their homes and been bankrupted, instead of spending $45 on an incomplete product.

The whiners here should relax. This game is full of problems, it does need a lot of work, but anyone who does not see the potential is a fool.

I have a I7 2600k, running at 4.3ghz and a GTX-570 and the game runs flawlessly for me in all conditions. Others who don't have as good a system are having problems, but the game is being optimized continually.

When you have a good system like mine, the game is truly spectacular.

More of a concern to me are the following issues:

1) Flight model lacks tailplane effects on takeoff; while stall turns, humpties and tailslides can definitely be done, they're nowhere near as 'crisp' as they ought to be. The spin entries are every bit as odd as they were in IL2. (that is from a real pilot's evaluation)

2) Performance and equipment of the 109's, Spitfires and Hurricanes are not modelled at all correctly, in particular speeds and climbs are low, some aircraft have either the wrong props or poor fuel mixture modelling, and the aircraft universally suffer from a lack of performance over 10,000 ft, and backfiring due to lack of modelling of the altitude compensation in the carburetion or fuel injection systems.

3) Not enough ships to model the 'Convoy' phase of the battle, which is really the only stage which can be flown now with large numbers of aircraft.

4) Game really does need reflections modelled. We saw reflections in a series of promo videos, but I have a feeling they were eliminated in this foolish waste of effort on the epilepsy issue. Reflections were a key factor in WWII combat, the glint of sun off a canopy or shiny piece of metal were often the means by which enemy aircraft were spotted. Rise of Flight does this quite well and CoD needs to re-introduce this.

Even with all these problems, the game clearly has a depth which is not matched by any others out there. I fly RISE OF FLIGHT, and while that game currently has a flight model closer to the real thing, its damage model, and graphics do not come near the immersiveness of CoD. RoF also does not have anywhere near as complete an aircraft set as CoD, RoF went for the money and produced nearly all the Scouts to sell to those who want quick gratification, but the game completely lacks the two seaters which were present in large numbers and which are an absolute necessity for a decent online war. Realistic campaigns are impossible in RoF either online or offline. That is not the case in CoD, with the planeset available right now I could design a Night 'Barge Bombing' campaign for the RAF, a 1941 daylight, 'Rodeo' campaign for the RAF, a late '40 'Jabo' campaign for the Germans, a 'Night Blitz' 1940-41 campaign for the Luftwaffe, or any number of others. (except the convoys WE NEED AN RN DESTROYER!!!)

In any case, the original poster of this thread is partially right. CoD will be the best, even if it isn't now.

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by *Buzzsaw*

Salute

From all the whining going on here, you'd think they'd lost their homes and been bankrupted, instead of spending $45 on an incomplete product.

The whiners here should relax. This game is full of problems, it does need a lot of work, but anyone who does not see the potential is a fool.

I have a I7 2600k, running at 4.3ghz and a GTX-570 and the game runs flawlessly for me in all conditions. Others who don't have as good a system are having problems, but the game is being optimized continually.

When you have a good system like mine, the game is truly spectacular.

More of a concern to me are the following issues:

1) Flight model lacks tailplane effects on takeoff; while stall turns, humpties and tailslides can definitely be done, they're nowhere near as 'crisp' as they ought to be. The spin entries are every bit as odd as they were in IL2. (that is from a real pilot's evaluation)

2) Performance and equipment of the 109's, Spitfires and Hurricanes are not modelled at all correctly, in particular speeds and climbs are low, some aircraft have either the wrong props or poor fuel mixture modelling, and the aircraft universally suffer from a lack of performance over 10,000 ft, and backfiring due to lack of modelling of the altitude compensation in the carburetion or fuel injection systems.

3) Not enough ships to model the 'Convoy' phase of the battle, which is really the only stage which can be flown now with large numbers of aircraft.

4) Game really does need reflections modelled. We saw reflections in a series of promo videos, but I have a feeling they were eliminated in this foolish waste of effort on the epilepsy issue. Reflections were a key factor in WWII combat, the glint of sun off a canopy or shiny piece of metal were often the means by which enemy aircraft were spotted. Rise of Flight does this quite well and CoD needs to re-introduce this.

Even with all these problems, the game clearly has a depth which is not matched by any others out there. I fly RISE OF FLIGHT, and while that game currently has a flight model closer to the real thing, its damage model, and graphics do not come near the immersiveness of CoD. RoF also does not have anywhere near as complete an aircraft set as CoD, RoF went for the money and produced nearly all the Scouts to sell to those who want quick gratification, but the game completely lacks the two seaters which were present in large numbers and which are an absolute necessity for a decent online war. Realistic campaigns are impossible in RoF either online or offline. That is not the case in CoD, with the planeset available right now I could design a Night 'Barge Bombing' campaign for the RAF, a 1941 daylight, 'Rodeo' campaign for the RAF, a late '40 'Jabo' campaign for the Germans, a 'Night Blitz' 1940-41 campaign for the Luftwaffe, or any number of others. (except the convoys WE NEED AN RN DESTROYER!!!)

In any case, the original poster of this thread is partially right. CoD will be the best, even if it isn't now.

Can you fly with 50-100 aircraft over london with mid range graphics settings and no stuttering/fps over 25? If not then you are not telling the truth.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

Can you fly with 50-100 aircraft over london with mid range graphics settings and no stuttering/fps over 25? If not then you are not telling the truth.

Haven't tried that yet, only have tried the plain jane missions, but the plain jane missions over London have been without any issues, at my top settings, even when I increased the number of aircraft. My GTX-570 is overclocked. (I plan on adding a second GTX-570 when SLI is enabled)

If you are having a problem with your setup, you are doing something wrong. (unless you haven't overclocked that 980x, which can easily go 4.5 ghz without liquid cooling by the way)

In any case, performance anxiety aside, I didn't expect to see full scale 200 plane battles over London in the initial release. We didn't see that kind of thing with the original IL-2, even at the late stages of IL-2 1946 you couldn't fight a 'Battle of Berlin' with two hundred plane raids, and this game is far more complex and demanding. I am encouraged that multicore support can be implimented, it would suggest to me that there is a lot of headroom to improve the capabilities of this engine, and I believe we will be fighting large battles over London in a year or two.

I am hoping this game is in for the long haul, like IL-2, if you guys would be realistic and stop with the continually whining and complaining and think a bit into the future, you might realize there is a LOT of potential available, and we have a lot of good things to look forward too.

Unless the whiners drown out the good responses and the games sales suffer and it ends up being cancelled as far as any further development is concerned...

Now, THAT would be something worth crying about.

What's we're seeing now is a bunch of 40 year old drama queens blowing off steam from their dayjobs.

[ParaB]

Originally Posted by Feathered_IV

What I do find clouds my opinion if the "sim" is the lack of content to enable anything more than a shallow BoB-lite skirmish generator.

/This.