Is the main issue with 1C the lack of communication? Feedback = Consideration for us?

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by PotNoodles

So three patches released and the rest are beta's leading up to the patch releases. You call that excellent support? Because I don't when you consider most beta games are free to play until they correct the faults.

should they be releasing patches daily? and a beta patch does not make a game beta, even worst case the game is still an RC but not a beta.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by PotNoodles

So three patches released and the rest are beta's leading up to the patch releases.

Correct.. 14+ patches in the last year

Originally Posted by PotNoodles

You call that excellent support?

Excellent.. Maybe?

One thing for sure is that 14+ patches in a year does NOT qualify as NO SUPPORT which is what you and yours would have us belive

Originally Posted by PotNoodles

Because I don't when you consider most beta games are free to play until they correct the faults.

Shocking..

You and yours DONT consider 14+ patches in the last year as support..

Who would have ever guessed that?

[PotNoodles]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

should they be releasing patches daily? and a beta patch does not make a game beta, even worst case the game is still an RC but not a beta.

No not daily, but I do wish they could release a patch that doesn't screw something else up everytime. I am getting where I am thinking what will go wrong this time when they release this patch. They then have to spend more time fixing the things they have broken and beta testing them, all this resulting in time and more time.

Btw - If it has a beta patch applied to it it's a beta in my eyes. An official patch is what makes it no longer a beta. At present it's back in beta stage because it's found to have faults still.

[CaptainDoggles]

Correct.. 14+ patches in the last year

No, the beta patches aren't separate patches. They're just early versions of the actual patches.

Stop being disingenuous.

[Mysticpuma]

Originally I posted on page 1......that is still the question

Currently I see a lot of in-fighting but this makes me wonder whether the lack of information really has made the community turn on itself?

Even a monthly update like the one I linked to a RoF would surely give users a chance to understand what to expect and what to look forward to?

Currently it seems that in-fighting occurs because no-one is sure just what is happening or going to happen, other than speculation?

If the speculation was changed to actual facts by the 1C team...maybe the clarity of position and direction would help those on either side of the fence to at-least sit on it together?

MP

[furbs]

Originally Posted by David Hayward

They have no choice. They can't sell BoM until CoD is fixed. That seems pretty obvious.

Yep again, which is also why i expect they will say "BOM fixes COD"

So to recap...

I dont expect COD to be fixed until BOM is released, if it is then i will buy BOM, if it isn't, then i will wait for a review first.

Which is what ive been saying all along.

[Force10]

14 patches that haven't really fixed much. It's the "tree falls in the forest" deal. If 14 patches are released, but they don't really fix the glaring problems, is that considered excellent support?

[Fearless_1]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

Correct.. 14+ patches in the last year


Excellent.. Maybe?

One thing for sure is that 14+ patches in a year does NOT qualify as NO SUPPORT which is what you and yours would have us belive


Shocking..

You and yours DONT consider 14+ patches in the last year as support..

Who would have ever guessed that?

I think I understand now. You just started simming and have no precedent to what a well written, well supported game is. I sure hope 1C has given you knee pads for all the "support" you keep giving them.

3 patches..... animations on control surfaces are fowled up, when AI commands were found to have problems they were deleted not fixed, the graphics rewrite was not to tweak existing settings to make them completely optimized, the rewrite was to make this game anything except BARELY PLAYABLE!

Look, here's all I hear when I come to this board:

TWO WEEKS!

These guys have more in common with Fighter Ops then they do with Il-2!

This game should have been released before it was rewritten, or at least finished before retail.

I've been flying around 1940's Europe since 1994 and I have never seen standards sink to the level it has been for the last 5 years. I know the genera is small, but this behavior makes neither economic, nor gaming sense!

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by furbs

Yep again, which is also why i expect they will say "BOM fixes COD"

Why? They makes absolutely no sense. They need us to have a working CoD BEFORE they can sell BoM. How is that not obvious to you?

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

Did I say no real work went into them? Did I say that they were the same patches?

Please quote where I did. Otherwise, stop misrepresenting what I say.

right here...

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

No, the beta patches aren't separate patches. They're just early versions of the actual patches.

Stop being disingenuous.

if they aren't separate patches but just early versions of the actual patches then you are saying they are the same patches...you know like they made a beta and a couple of weeks later gave it a new version number and called it a release.
I'm not misrepresenting anything, you are desparately trying to tell us the devs have done 'nothing' in the way of trying to fix this yet here we are reminding you that on 14 separate occasions a different patch be it a beta or release that had to be coded each time.