oleg, you better hurry, RoF is releasing a ww-2 sim next - Page 12

brando · #**111** 06-29-2009, 07:22 PM

Quote:

If you have a product that is broken, that is bad
If you have a product that is late, that is bad

The worst of the two by far is "broken".

+1

I remember firing up the original IL2 Sturmovik on my AMD Palomino rig with (wow) 512Mb RAM and a 64Mb Radeon 8500 and being amazed at the result. Within hours I was flying on-line with over 20 other people in a UBI-server, all of us reeling from the improvements over the flight-sims we had come from. It was new, it was different but above all, it worked. Straight from the box onto the on-line server. We never looked back.

Blackdog_kt · #**112** 06-30-2009, 05:11 PM

That's actually a very good point. The more anticipated a title is, the more of an anti-climax people experience when it is found lacking in areas of basic functionality.

That's also why the IL2 add ons and expansions sold so well. People had a lot of the new aircraft already from the free updates and patches. What made them sell well is the new maps and the ease of installation.

Igo kyu · #**113** 06-30-2009, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Former_Older

Bitch slap me? OK, well good luck to them

Let me try to explain it to you

If you have a product that is broken, that is bad
If you have a product that is late, that is bad

The worst of the two by far is "broken". That's an accepted business principle in the Real World of Grown Ups. Now, your little opinion may be otherwise, and the darling little kidz at the Duke Nukem summercamp might think the other way around too, but you know what? Kidz think the darnedest things, and they think they know it all without having done squat. It's about the same as a fart in church- it stinks, there's no substance to it, and it makes me laugh. So sure, the Duke Nukem community might not like me saying "Broken is better than late"; and good for them. Can you guess how much I give a rat ass about what they think about sunshine, lollipops, rainbows or anything I say?

It's a joke.

Duke Nukem is already 10 years late, and recently it's been cancelled. Late as in "never" isn't actually that much different from utterly broken, you can't ever play it either way.

virre89 · #**114** 07-01-2009, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Former_Older

Bitch slap me? OK, well good luck to them

Let me try to explain it to you

If you have a product that is broken, that is bad
If you have a product that is late, that is bad

The worst of the two by far is "broken". That's an accepted business principle in the Real World of Grown Ups. Now, your little opinion may be otherwise, and the darling little kidz at the Duke Nukem summercamp might think the other way around too, but you know what? Kidz think the darnedest things, and they think they know it all without having done squat. It's about the same as a fart in church- it stinks, there's no substance to it, and it makes me laugh. So sure, the Duke Nukem community might not like me saying "Broken is better than late"; and good for them. Can you guess how much I give a rat ass about what they think about sunshine, lollipops, rainbows or anything I say?

Dude it was meant to be a little funny whats your issue?
And you call the people at 3d realms kids just because Duke Nukem is an action title, seriously they've for sure over 2000+ members which have hung around the forum since they were first put there, and thats what? around 10+ years my friend, more than enough for more than kids to hang around.

Think before you post and i wouldn't be surprised if their community has less whine than this one from time to time and then we're talking a heck load of years of waiting, anyway i don't think they care much for your words either seeing as it was just a little joke.

Being a fan om simulators doesn't make your more mature than a cod player by default..it's up to each individual.

DoolittleRaider · #**115** 07-03-2009, 03:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feathered_IV

Thanks ElAurens. Based on your assessment and Oleg's positive comments also, I've ordered my copy of RoF too.

BIG mistake!!! For every glowing review at teh ROF forum, there are 6 or so that take the opposite opinion.

Good luck. You'll need it.

I consider that I lost $40 buying ROF on Day One from Gogamer. I surely won't be spending $5-$10 each (who knows how much really) for additional aircraft. My detailed reviews and experiences with ROFcan be found at the ROF forums...under Doolittle81

Chivas · #**116** 07-03-2009, 05:18 AM

My experience with ROF is a positive one. There are a few glitches but ROF is a very realistic combat flight experience that will steadily improve over the years. Cheapest entertainment available anywhere.

lbuchele · #**117** 07-03-2009, 02:30 PM

I like very much Oleg Maddox work. I think he is the best in the genre , but there is no need to bash other people work.
Even Oleg is satisfied in seen good combat sims emerging , even if in unfinished state at the start.(like Il2 when launched)
It made our genre of hobby stronger .

flyingbullseye · #**118** 07-03-2009, 07:14 PM

+1.

With more competition we as simmers should only hope to gain better more realistic sims. Without that competition we'd still be playing CFS3.

Flyingbullseye

DoolittleRaider · #**119** 07-04-2009, 02:42 AM

As expected...blatantly obvious Shill boy(s)...I won't say which one...just watch the phraseology versus that of the creators of the game. It's laughable how the shills are out there on the various forums pretending to be innocent and objective Customers...who LOVE the greatness of ROF. Transparent...except to fools. imho

What a joke.

Chivas · #**120** 07-04-2009, 05:22 AM

Its unfortunate that some of us have no clue on what's involved in making todays combat flight sims. Even Microsoft, who were able to make money on their flight sims quit the genre. It was just to much work for the profits being made. Today we only have two companies making combat flight sims from scratch, ROF and Maddox. I've heard nothing for sometime from A2A or 777 studios on their projects enhancing the old Rowan engine. It appears that Maddox made enough monies to extend the development of SOW until its a more polished sim.

The ROF developers don't have that luxury. They've had to put out an unfinished sim to fund further work. They say their in it for the long haul, but that could easily be short circuited if initial sales are poor. ROF's excellent Aircraft models, Engine Management, Terrain, Flight Model, and Damage Model are an excellent base to expand from. Even as is you can spend many hours and days learning the FM's, improving your weapons, and navigation skills. Well worth the 39 bucks IMHO. By the time I'm profient at these tasks, I'm sure that there will be bug fixes, and added content.

You can chose to trash everything they've done, desuading anyone else who will listen, and kill a developer we so sorely need. Or you can support them with your 39 bucks so ROF can develop into a benchmark WW1 sim, establishing a company that could produce combat flight sims for years. Our choice.