Friday Update - December 9, 2011

[Buchon]

Originally Posted by furbs

The graphics are being rewritten, the sounds been rewritten, the AI, the physics, its all been rewritten because its broken old outdated code that doesn't work very well.
CLOD is toast.
Why else would Luthier say all the features that were supposed to be in CLOD will now only be available in the sequel?

The development team are a joke IMO. The whole development of CLOD from start to now has been a joke. 7 years in development? ...a joke. Olegs vanishing act on day 1 of release?... a joke. the epilepsy filter...a joke.
Almost a year after release and CLOD still has many many bugs, problems and missing features that they have given up and moved on to a sequel, im willing to bet BOM will be a stand alone and not be able to be merged with CLOD because they will have binned it.

I found more hilarius your post than all the "jokes" described

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by furbs

The graphics are being rewritten, the sounds been rewritten, the AI, the physics, its all been rewritten because its broken old outdated code that doesn't work very well.
CLOD is toast.
Why else would Luthier say all the features that were supposed to be in CLOD will now only be available in the sequel?

Clearly your not a programer..

Because if you were you would understand that upgrading the graphics and audio engines does not automaticaly delete all the..

3D external plane models
3D cockpit models
3D map models
FM code
DM code
Network code
etc.. etc.. etc..

All of which can be reused..

That stuff is the bulk of the sim

Not the eye-candy!

CoD would NOT be the first game to upgrad its graphics engine

[furbs]

Almost EVERY feature of CLOD is broken or bugged or missing.
FM
DM
Weather
Radio commands
Ground handling
CEM
Track recorder
Sound
Map features
No CO-OPs
Radar
Single player Campaigns
Memory leaks
Exe crashes

This is after 7 years of development, almost a year after release and 4 patches.

Yes, most flightsims are like this....give me a break Ace, il have what ever your smoking.

Edit...i forgot... no FSAA and a UI that still looks like its been made in 1995

[5./JG27.Farber]

I know somethings that will not be in the sequal - the programmers....


Bwahahahahah.

At last somebody else who like me cannot see the 'Emperors new clothes', to be fair I never saw them during the development either, and certainly I saw through all the BS that Oleg and Luthier were spouting.


To Quote Johnny Rotten "Ever feel like you've been cheated" !!


All you other muppets who think this is all positive deserve to be ripped off in future, enough for me.

[Ze-Jamz]

De ja vu anyone...

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by furbs

Almost EVERY feature of CLOD is broken or bugged or missing.

That is an easy claim to toss out..

But much harder to prove..

As a mater of FACT I know that if you made an atemp to provide proof on each of those items you would find, and maybe even learn, that most if not all of your statements fall into the category of 'personal', as in your opinion.

Take DM for example.. I challenge you to FIRST make a clear statement, than provide proof to support your statement. After a few minutes I think you will realize you have nothing to support your statement.

For example.. Lets assume that you said.. The elevator of the Bf109 should not become in-op after X amount of .303 hits

Now show us your real world data, and our structural analysis to support this claim along with your modeling of the .303 rounds

See?

Not so easy is it, thus, your statements that such and such is broken or bugged or missing has very little merit upon closer inspection.. Granted I am sure the gloom'n'doom band wagon will disagree with me and hold you up as some sort of messiah, but for those based in reality, they will see your claims as I see them.

As your personal opinion, not fact

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

That is an easy claim to toss out..

But much harder to prove..

As a mater of FACT I know that if you made an atemp to provide proof on each of those items you would find, and maybe even learn, that most if not all of your statements fall into the category of 'personal', as in your opinion.

Take DM for example.. I challenge you to FIRST make a clear statement, than provide proof to support your statement. After a few minutes I think you will realize you have nothing to support your statement.

For example.. Lets assume that you said.. The elevator of the Bf109 should not become in-op after X amount of .303 hits

Now show us your real world data, and our structural analysis to support this claim along with your modeling of the .303 rounds

See?

Not so easy is it, thus, your statements that such and such is broken or bugged or missing has very little merit upon closer inspection.. Granted I am sure the gloom'n'doom band wagon will disagree with me and hold you up as some sort of messiah, but for those based in reality, they will see your claims as I see them.

As your personal opinion, not fact

No one takes you seriously Ace, your a joke.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

No one takes you seriously Ace, your a joke.

[furbs]

OK DM...ive shot 109s and been flying 109s where the fuel tank has exploded and then the 109 has carried on flying while on fire and it has not affected the flight performance at all.
I would say that is a DM bug.