Friday Update, January 27, 2012

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by merlin1

You forgot...

Is hoax this method of selling ?...............oh hell yes

Hoax? it would be a Hoax if we got a potato instead of a game, I understand english might not be your first language.

Most people got the software they wanted, it just needs fixing, I am amazed at the things people complain about, I have had plenty of games in my time that didn't run well on release, crashed all the time, they needed loads of patching, COD doesn't sound like the biggest offender in history at all.

[6BL Bird-Dog]

To Black Six & Luthier,
Many thanks for the information on the problems the team are facing at present and enlightening us as to why it has taken ,and will take more time still.The additional complexity of the new product over the il2 1946 series is now more understandable.I am glad to hear the BoM release will be merged with CloD ,this also makes it clear that the existing known issues with the present release wiil be fixed before any seqel .
Fellow forum Members
In the past as others do I have vented my views about the state of the release: & understand why some forum mebers feel frustrated.
I am now looking foreward to the eventual rectification and resulting patch(s).
I belive now would be a good time to put it behind us and be more positive about the games future as any further venting is only repeating what many others ,including me, have already said again & again & again &..........
Were not there yet but closer than we were before
PS:Luthier
Please look it no a better Coop Gui as a lot of members would like this changed.

[Cobra8472]

For those of you doubting the 1 year / aircraft timeframe;

I've been working with FS aircraft for the past 4 years-- and worked with dozens of payware companies.

Generally, an aircraft is pushed out in ~3 months, and can easily take up to 4-6. Tubeliners for FS take even longer (systems coding is not easy).

Note, that this is with a full dedicated team, working one ONE aircraft-- for an already established sim with well-documented features.

However, we have the added advantage of not worrying about; damage models, LoD's, damage states, components, 100% accurate collision boxes, etc, all of which are incredibly important in CloD

It is completely reasonable to use at least 6-8 months per aircraft in development then + testing it and making sure it flies according to specs.

[JG53_Valantine]

@ Force10 - A game I waited and waited for nearly 10 years to arrive - Stalker Shadow of Chernobyl - I bought a whole new system with Windows Vista for it only to find the exe crashed within seconds of launch on vista until the first patch - by which time several friends had ruined the story for me!

Rise of flight wasn't too great at launch either and took a year to be patched to a decent stage.

Eitehr way though, comparing CloD now to CloD at launch and it ahs come a hell of a long way and promises to continue to grow and bring us all new things!
V

[McHilt]

Maybe a nice pic will bring this thread a bit more ON topic... let's hope so

[merlin1]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

Hoax? it would be a Hoax if we got a potato instead of a game, I understand english might not be your first language.

Most people got the software they wanted, it just needs fixing, I am amazed at the things people complain about, I have had plenty of games in my time that didn't run well on release, crashed all the time, they needed loads of patching, COD doesn't sound like the biggest offender in history at all.

Yes, English in not my first language. And yes, you understand me perfectly what I want to say.

[slm]

Nice Rata. Release the patch when it's ready...

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by Cobra8472

For those of you doubting the 1 year / aircraft timeframe;

I've been working with FS aircraft for the past 4 years-- and worked with dozens of payware companies.

Generally, an aircraft is pushed out in ~3 months, and can easily take up to 4-6. Tubeliners for FS take even longer (systems coding is not easy).

Note, that this is with a full dedicated team, working one ONE aircraft-- for an already established sim with well-documented features.

However, we have the added advantage of not worrying about; damage models, LoD's, damage states, components, 100% accurate collision boxes, etc, all of which are incredibly important in CloD

It is completely reasonable to use at least 6-8 months per aircraft in development then + testing it and making sure it flies according to specs.

Cobra

Brace yourself to be called a liar or worse..

Why?

Because self proclaimed experts who have never done any of this type of work have already spoken and determined that it does not take that long to do. And the only way it could take that long is if 'you' are

1) a liar
2) not managing your team very well
3) stupid
4) all of the above

Just a little heads up!

But I not being one of those do want to thank you for providing some insite as to how much effort does go into doing what you do! S!

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Force10

Would you care to name another flight sim or game that was in development for 7 years and was released in worse shape? I didn't think so...

did you really just pre-empt your answer 'before' I replied?

By rights any game that ever had a patch was broken to some extent, yes 7 years development obviously wasn't enough time but I guess UBI put the screw down on them to release and the public were getting anxious.

Originally Posted by bongodriver

Hoax? it would be a Hoax if we got a potato instead of a game, I understand english might not be your first language.

Most people got the software they wanted, it just needs fixing, I am amazed at the things people complain about, I have had plenty of games in my time that didn't run well on release, crashed all the time, they needed loads of patching, COD doesn't sound like the biggest offender in history at all.

You know, in Quebec, many years ago the Goverment passed a legislation
forbiding any kind of TV advertising aimed at kids...No more raging heartpounding ads with planes and cars flying around like magic....They were not hoax...They were called: misrepresentative of the real attributes of a specific toy...Therefore causing a loooooooooooooooooots of disapointements, crying and whining, even though the Parents paid big money for those toys.
The Makers like Hasbro , Mattel and all the others opposed this law by stating that they were just showing what could be done in certain situations, and with lots of illegal pills of course. But the fact is, even though kids are whiners by nature, and uneducated young brats for many of them, the court ruled that you just cant advertise a product that wont do what is ''promised'' by the understanding of this particuliar clientele. Even if it is obvious for a grown and intelligent average person.