Well...we said it would be a problem..

[Gribbers]

He'll get the shock of his life if/when they fix it.

He'll also probably be rubbish at online if he relies on it now.

Originally Posted by Gribbers

He'll get the shock of his life if/when they fix it.

He'll also probably be rubbish at online if he relies on it now.

Luthier as already said it will never be fixed, its funny really we have realistic(ish) engine management and then you can fly straight through a forest, this makes it a 'game' not a sim.

[JG52Krupi]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

Luthier as already said it will never be fixed, its funny really we have realistic(ish) engine management and then you can fly straight through a forest, this makes it a 'game' not a sim.

Where did he say it would not be fixed?

I call BS on this...

Originally Posted by JG52Krupi

Where did he say it would not be fixed?

I call BS on this...

No BS mate, he said it during development.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

No BS mate, he said it during development.

Funny how you adapt what is said to suit your arguments, one minute anything mentioned in development is a 'broken promise' and the next thing is taken as gospel as long as it fits with your pessimism.

[Shado]

10. Q: I can fly through trees without receiving any damage.

A: Since Cliffs of Dover has more shrubbery in it than perhaps any other flight sim developed so far - hundreds of thousands of trees around the player - enabling collision for the trees grinds the game to a complete halt, especially as they need to be tracked around every plane on the map and not just the player's. Making collisions less precise leads to equally poor results, when planes may fly through a tree but crash into seemingly empty space.
We know this is extremely important. The solution is there, but it still eludes us.

Taken from Luthier's FAQ:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=19819

[hiro]

+1 on the every 3rd tree having a hitbox . . .

they'd have to code it so when forest is selectable to remove the hitboxes w/ the trees when forest is unchecked, or we'd be back to the invisible tree thing.

Heck I wouldn't mind even if it was every 10th tree had a hitbox, most planes going low will quickly smack the 10th tree.

Unless the game's architecture is designed that putting hitboxes for trees will lead to a cascade effect that breaks more stuff than fixes, but that is just merely speculation . . . why Luthier said it was a no fix.

Also if he said that, did he give a time frame? In a situation like this, it would be a no fix because bigger fish to fry but once its up and working find and dandy . . . then it would be doable.


TreeUK, any chance of finding that post where Luthier said he wasn't going to fix the no collision tree thing?

[CaptainDoggles]

Tree reinterprets the facts to fit his personal viewpoint. I've gone through pages of Luthier's posts and only found a couple where he mentions it's a severe problem but nowhere that I have read does he say it will not be fixed.

Tree, either provide a direct quote or stfu.

[Tiger27]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

Luthier as already said it will never be fixed, its funny really we have realistic(ish) engine management and then you can fly straight through a forest, this makes it a 'game' not a sim.

If it was a forest sim yes, but as the idea is to simulate ww2, then I dont think this turns a sim into a game, how many times in the BOB did pilots fly below tree top height?

[GOA_Potenz]

well when you have to finde a flat space for a crash landing, this is most about killing inmersion and online fairness, plus you said RoF doesn't have the same amount of trees/buildings, but even the dead trees in nomansland has collition boxes, and you have entire huge forests with collition boxes that make a low level fight a challenge, touch a tree top and you can end up in the ground