Thoughts about Friday's update

[jimbop]

Originally Posted by Skoshi Tiger

What version of the sim is it happening in? Is it the damage model that is bugged or the visual representation?

Could it fall into the same category as the aircraft flying with their wheels down? Or the 109 that explode in a fireball and keep on going? The flight model is OK but the graphics are wrong.

Did that aircraft with parts missing recieve the message about loosing the part. Or did the part just get damaged?

What ever it is, hopefully it will get fixed.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=34435

[hiro]

I think they stopped working on Clod because the engine is broke. They figure to put all effort into fixing the game engine, with limited resources.

before Luthier's post Resources were divided into, CLOD,Game Engine, BOM.

Now they've decided to finalize Clod, and bet heavily on sebulba, er i mean bet everything on game engine and bom. they've taken the resources that CLOD is using and putting it into the game engine, and if they're not on game engine detail, they're on BOM duty.

That way the game engine code is working (this is a theory of course) and they can just drop the BOM details and then test, but the bugs will not be game breaking ones we've had with CLOD, it'll be minor ones . . . (since the engine is basically solid)

And that's why they say the CLOD patches will come with the new game, they'll just take what works with BOM and swap out the detail stuffs (maps n planes etc) for CLOD over the working game engine to have a BOM quality level of CLOD.

There are only really two sides to this. Good VS Evil .



Good: hopes the next will be something awesome and working, and the devs learned from their "mistakes."

Evil: they'll just use the lack of ww 2 sims to rope people out of hard earned cash, show a working demo, but that is only what will work, they'll lie and say its out in next 2 weeks but we won't see a game for 10 years and when it does come out they will deliver another beta max . . .

Originally Posted by hiro

I think they stopped working on Clod because the engine is broke. They figure to put all effort into fixing the game engine, with limited resources.

before Luthier's post Resources were divided into, CLOD,Game Engine, BOM.

Now they've decided to finalize Clod, and bet heavily on sebulba, er i mean bet everything on game engine and bom. they've taken the resources that CLOD is using and putting it into the game engine, and if they're not on game engine detail, they're on BOM duty.

That way the game engine code is working (this is a theory of course) and they can just drop the BOM details and then test, but the bugs will not be game breaking ones we've had with CLOD, it'll be minor ones . . . (since the engine is basically solid)

And that's why they say the CLOD patches will come with the new game, they'll just take what works with BOM and swap out the detail stuffs (maps n planes etc) for CLOD over the working game engine to have a BOM quality level of CLOD.

There are only really two sides to this. Good VS Evil .



Good: hopes the next will be something awesome and working, and the devs learned from their "mistakes."

Evil: they'll just use the lack of ww 2 sims to rope people out of hard earned cash, show a working demo, but that is only what will work, they'll lie and say its out in next 2 weeks but we won't see a game for 10 years and when it does come out they will deliver another beta max . . .

What I fail to understand is that we all know the game engine is poor, yet they want to use it for the sequel, if they can fix it for the sequel then why not release that in a patch for CLOD standalone, to me its quite obvious that Luthier is saying if you want CLOD fixed you have to buy our sequel.

[Feathered_IV]

I was reading it as, engine changes will be introduced to clod in a patch. But for actual gameplay enhancements and features of substance, please buy our sequel.

[kendo65]

I think we are into another grey area with all this. My original understanding was that the game engine was being reworked over the last year and tested in the various beta patches that have been released.

The final Steam version of this patch then (RC coming soon!?) would give us the new game engine for COD/BOM and so provide much improved performance. No further Battle of Britain specific content would then be developed for COD.

The developers would continue to develop features such as weather, AA, clouds, fix tree collision, etc that would be introduced in the sequel but would be backwards compatible with COD - so purchase of the sequel would then give us access to these features in our COD missions too.

I see a few problems with this reading though - their continued struggle to master the various issues in the last three beta patches and get a finalised Steam patch shows continuing underlying problems. I suspect that the upcoming Steam patch will NOT therefore represent the completion of the new engine, but that work will continue in the future.

The fact that AA will not be available in the next patch surely supports the conclusion that further work will be needed on the engine in future. Similarly for the tree collision and possibly dynamic weather?

In short it's messy.

[kendo65]

On Luthier's Questions.

With the continued complete radio silence on this I'm starting to think the unthinkable - maybe they've decided if they don't mention it again we'll gradually forget about it?

That is, we won't be getting the answers at all.

Even a month ago I wouldn't have believed this. Now, I don't rule anything out - even some of Tree's wilder conspiracy theories are starting to look plausible.

Like others here I also wasn't impressed by B6's vanishing act all last week, only to reappear on Saturday with the excuse that he couldn't tell us anything because it was the weekend. A little transparent that one.

[furbs]

Originally Posted by kendo65

On Luthier's Questions.

With the continued complete radio silence on this I'm starting to think the unthinkable and suspect that they may have decided that if they don't mention it again we'll gradually forget all about it?

That is, we won't be getting the answers at all.

Even a month ago I wouldn't have believed this. Now, I don't rule anything out - even some of Tree's wilder conspiracy theories are starting to look plausible.

Like others here I also wasn't impressed by B6's vanishing act all last week, only to reappear on Saturday with the excuse that he couldn't tell us anything because it was the weekend. A little transparent that one.

Its just the same stuff that has been going on for the last 19 months and more, seriously this sim has been the worst i have ever seen in all my gaming life for every aspect of producing a flight sim or any piece of software for that matter.
Everything for pre-release PR, how the launch was handled, delays on patches, buggy patches, beta or alpha patches, community management, websites, everything has been a poorly mismanaged disaster.

The latest shot in the foot from Luthier, is just a perfect example of how to balls up a simple chance to create some goodwill within this community and build some bridges, but nope its just another feck up to add to the long list of feck ups.

None of this should surprise anyone anymore, its just what we expect from this sim.

I feel sorry for B6 and prob most of the programing team to working for such a poorly managed, hopeless leadership.

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by kendo65

On Luthier's Questions.

With the continued complete radio silence on this I'm starting to think the unthinkable - maybe they've decided if they don't mention it again we'll gradually forget about it?

That is, we won't be getting the answers at all.

Even a month ago I wouldn't have believed this. Now, I don't rule anything out - even some of Tree's wilder conspiracy theories are starting to look plausible.

Like others here I also wasn't impressed by B6's vanishing act all last week, only to reappear on Saturday with the excuse that he couldn't tell us anything because it was the weekend. A little transparent that one.

your getting exhausted from the waiting and are falling under the spell of the whiners, be aware its a fatal contagious disease if you let it develop

lets look at some of what we do know
- CoD was a disaster because it was a forced premature release 1 yr to early
- the initial scramble in the first 6 months to try and plug the holes and patch it didnt work to make it playable (other then for people who have a monster PC) or improve completion of content. some bug fixes were provided, but many bugs remained.
- 1c/luthier then decided to rewrite the gfx engine from scratch and by doing so had to decide to largely abandon work on fixing CoD bugs or add features (this was bluntly stated months ago, yet people here keeping choosing not to accept this). obviously fixing the gfx engine was the most important issue for CoD, so it was in fact fixing CoD but was going to cause a MAJOR delay in time before it could be completed, but had the advantage of addressing the main issue for making BoM a success, so we cant blame him for making that hard choice (imposed by the bean counters). personally i see this as problematic for the reputation of il2-1C, and a big comprehensive final patch is badly needed to recover some of their reputation and prevent the bad reviews from not being revised later on as patches were released. this initial release of a "bad CoD" however provided them with enough funds to continue (rather then shut down the product series completely, so however counter intuitive it seems releasing it like that was actually good news odd as it may sound)
- from then on 1/2 their programing team then worked exclusively on BoM as the next release (planes, game object, scenery) while the other half focused on the complete rebuild of the gfx engine and game engine
- then for a long period CoD patches were non existent, communication ground to a halt (till B6 recently appeared), customer speculation mounted in the information vacuum. frustration increased in the forum and bad reviews online increased, but there is/was simply no manpower or resources to address CoD problems, no matter the volume of complaints.
- august 2012 the first good performance patch was released, indicating the work to date from the gfx engine rebuilt the previous 12 months
- september 2012 luthier confirms that there will only be one further bug fixing patch together with the further improved gfx engine work. after that BoM will contain any further fixes and can then be installed over CoD. luthier also indicates that the continuation of the whole SoW series will depend on the success of BoM, eg if these sales are NOT good within the first 6 months and they generate positive reviews to recoup their high standing in the sim market (which was going to be opened to 3e party designers of planes and scenery etc, remember ?), then they might have to close shop completely. this is something many people here fail to grasp !

meanwhile the little forum'itis in residence here keep running around in circles chasing their own tails by asking, demanding, screaming to fix this and that, and throwing insults around that they "want it now and deserve it now" and that luthier should talk to them NOW and is accountable to them personally. when luthier or B6 do appear they are subject to abuse and disrespect, who would stay around and try and have a normal conversation under those conditions ? and is anybody here providing them with the means to put more of their limited resources into fixing CoD, err no ! it is what it is, CoD was a forced release that has largely been abandoned, we were told as much over 9 months ago

if you (and the others here) like flight sims ? want a chance to ever get a decent next gen ww2 flight sim ? then how about doing something positive to help it become true. that doesnt mean you cant be frustrated with the delays, but it would mean you actually help to do something to help it NOT FLOP ! in comparison, if you take somebody like Tree for ex, who was here for years constantly speculating on the negatives before it was even released because he felt hurt and slighted by the previous delays, then see how he rejoiced and was in glee when the release was problematic, and in a perverted sense of seeking attention he then continued to focus ONLY ON THE NEGATIVES since then. he even does so by giving new forum members deliberately misleading information and undermining their possible enjoyment of the sim. even now in a predictable fashion he would like nothing more then for BoM to fail as well, and even if it is reasonably good on release (yes, and with a few bugs omg the sky is falling) and this better product allows the series to continue to improve further in the next years, it is easy to predict tree will STILL do nothing but complain about it. is that what you want to become a part of ?

given that progress on CoD is very slow and BoM some time away in the future, rather then be frustrated with CoD's problems just see yourself as a highly trained beta tester who is perfectly placed to provide constructive feedback for a great ww2 flightsim in the making (the fixed CoD and BoM), and do something about helping it become true (while you go off and play other games you might find less frustrating). the most practical thing i can think of in that regard is for the community to get an organized and provide well documented list of major bugs and gameplay problems, and have them in priority of importance and focused on addressing both general gameplay issues (like lack of multiplayer co-op) as well as bug fixes (reversed controls, some gauges not working), FM errors in aircraft performance, specific DM errors, and important lack of features (inability to set specific FoV's for monitor size for ex). and no, a user run bug tracking website and a few long technical threads on some frustrating bugs for CoD is not enough in that regard, we cant rely or depend on luthier and their tech's to go trawling thru those and pick out a few snippets of wisdom. there is only going to be ONE more chance to get some badly needed fixes and (small) new features in CoD, if we want this to be as good as possible we need to help present this information in an orderly and systematic fashion to luthier (because his lack of time doesnt allow him to be as thorough as we would like, and the current "bug report" thread in this forum is a major jumbled cluster of bugs/errors/missing-features that sets no indication of priority or significance) )

so what is your choice, the blue pill or the red pill ? life will never be the same after (choose between hammering nails in the coffin of CoD and sabotage the development of BoM, or help create a fixed CoD and a decent BoM).

[Toni74]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

What I fail to understand is that we all know the game engine is poor, yet they want to use it for the sequel, if they can fix it for the sequel then why not release that in a patch for CLOD standalone, to me its quite obvious that Luthier is saying if you want CLOD fixed you have to buy our sequel.

they're evil. they want our money!

[Von Crapenhauser]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

What I fail to understand is that we all know the game engine is poor, yet they want to use it for the sequel, if they can fix it for the sequel then why not release that in a patch for CLOD standalone, to me its quite obvious that Luthier is saying if you want CLOD fixed you have to buy our sequel.

I think With Respect some people have forgotten IL2,Pacific fighters and 1946.
What i see here is bussiness as usual.
The Sequal will load over Clod(so weve been Told),same as allways.

It seem its pessimists Vs Optimists.
I play Offline ATM,Are all these comlpaints directed at the Online Game???
I have no problem with this game,Except for the radio commands falling on deaf ears.

I for one am looking forward to the next Sequal(just a shame its not the European theatre of opperations or Middle east maybe).
Maybe on the next sequal?
Stll I wait with bated breath,until then I will play Clod occasionally Between plays of Rise of Flight.